Young Person v. Provincial Director, 2026 ONCRB 10

CUSTODY REVIEW BOARD

This case relates to the Youth Criminal Justice Act, S.C. 2002, c.1 (“YCJA”). Under sections 110(1) and 129 of the YCJA, no one is allowed to make public any information that would identify a youth who is in detention or custody. Also, no one is allowed to share the information contained in this document with anyone unless the YCJA says it can be shared. In addition, the proceedings of the Custody Review Board (“CRB”) are private. Therefore, all identifying information in this decision has been removed.

No one can show the unredacted decision to anyone else (except the Applicant’s lawyer or others named in the YCJA) or make it public by putting it “online” or giving it to the media. There may be legal consequences if this information is shared contrary to the YCJA in accordance with s.138(1) of the YCJA.

BETWEEN:

Young Person

Applicant

-and-

Provincial Director

Respondent

REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION

Adjudicator: Malcolm M. MacFarlane

Date: January 29, 2026

Citation: 2026 ONCRB 10

Indexed as: Young Person v Provincial Director (CYFSA s.152)

OVERVIEW

1This is an Application with the Custody Review Board (“CRB”) for a review of the Applicant’s placement under subsection 152(1)(a) of the Child, Youth and Family Services Act 2017, S.O. 2017, c.14, Sched.1 (“CYFSA”). The Applicant seeks a review of the Provincial Director’s decision to place him in secure detention at [FACILITY 1] in [city 1]. The Applicant seeks to be returned to , and open custody facility in [city 1] where he was previously placed.

2In conducting this review, I spoke to:

• The Applicant;
• M.E., staff at [FACILITY 1];
• J.P, Youth Probation Officer;
• S.J. Staff at [FACILITY 2].

3In addition, I reviewed the following documents:

• Application received [date];
• Level of Detention Assessment from [FACILITY 2] dated [date]; transferring young person from [FACILITY 2] to [FACILITY 1];
• Warrant Remanding a Young Person, dated [date];
• Case Management Reintegration Plan from [FACILITY 2] dated [ate].

ISSUE

4Is the Applicant’s placement at [FACILITY 1] appropriate to meet his needs?

RESULT

The Applicant’s placement at [FACILITY 1] is appropriate to meet his needs. I confirm the Provincial Director’s decision to place the Applicant at [FACILITY 1].

ANALYSIS

Background

5The Applicant is a [age]-year-old youth who was transferred on [date] from [FACILITY 2], an open custody facility in [city 1], to [FACILITY 1], a secure detention facility also in [city 1] following an incident at [FACILITY 2] in which he pushed a staff person. The Applicant had been placed at [FACILITY 2] for about three months prior to his transfer to [FACILITY 1]. The Applicant is facing charges including three charges of assault with a weapon, possession of a weapon for dangerous purpose, break and enter a dwelling house, and mischief. Although the Applicant did not self identify, information sources and the Applicant himself confirm that the Applicant is an Indigenous youth from a remote fly in community in [region province] with a largely Indigenous population. In his interviews with me, the Applicant had difficulty clearly articulating his issues at [FACILITY 1], his needs, and his reasons for requesting a transfer. His replies to my questions were often short, and he did not elaborate. This made it challenging to identify and discuss the Applicant’s needs.

6The Applicant did not provide names or contact information for family members, legal counsel, or other information sources who could help me better understand his needs. For this reason, my information sources are limited to representatives from the facilities where the Applicant was placed, and to his probation officer, who does not know the Applicant well, as he has only been involved with the Applicant in a detention support and management capacity. Regarding the Applicant’s reasons for seeking a transfer, the Applicant mentioned dissatisfaction with the food at [FACILITY 1], and not being allowed to go outside due to the facility being locked down. He did not identify issues with inmates or facility staff. He did not identify safety concerns or health concerns. He was not sure what programming he would benefit from and could not articulate why a return to [FACILITY 2] would be better for him or how such a return would better meet his needs. He denied issues with substance use. He did admit that school was “not great” as he was “not doing the work.”

Needs Analysis

Based on my conversations with the Applicant and other information sources, I find the Applicant has needs in the following areas: educational needs, peer relationship needs, anger management needs, substance use needs, family connection needs, trauma counselling needs, and cultural needs.

Educational needs.

7The Applicant is working on grade [number] coursework. He states that school at [FACILITY 1] is “not great” as he is “not doing the work.” [FACILITY 2] staff indicated that the Applicant also struggled with school in that facility. They describe the Applicant as struggling to attend, and not actively working, although he did achieve a credit or two with a lot of effort. [FACILITY 2] staff indicated that the Applicant had not been attending school regularly in the community for several years. [FACILITY 2] provided the Applicant with “specialized” educational supports; however, it was not clear exactly what those “specialized” supports were. [FACILITY 2] staff were not aware of any diagnosis for the Applicant of learning disability or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder that might affect his learning experience. They did not identify the Applicant as having an Individualized Education Plan (IEP). It is unclear why the Applicant has not been attending school in the community.

8[FACILITY 1] offers on site educational programming that can meet the Applicant’s needs. The Applicant admitted he needs to attend more regularly and make more of an effort with his coursework. The Applicant spoke only briefly in my interviews with him. [FACILITY 2] staff observed that the Applicant sometimes seems to have difficulty communicating. This may suggest the need for the Applicant’s teachers to assess his needs and the possible need for an IEP to assist him with his learning. I find that [FACILITY 1] is able to meet the Applicant’s educational needs, particularly if the Applicant actively engages with [FACILITY 1] educational programming and seeks the assistance of teachers and other staff.

Peer relationship needs.

9While the Applicant indicated to me in his interviews that he did not have issues with peer relationships, [FACILITY 2] staff did raise a concern that the Applicant was easily influenced by peers. At times, the Applicant would follow cues from peers that led him into behavioural issues and a tendency to ignore or not follow staff direction. [FACILITY 2] staff indicated that at times the Applicant would be bullied by other peers, and at other times he engaged in bullying behaviours himself. Staff identified a pattern of progressive deterioration in his behaviour. The Applicant became more aggressive and engaged in intimidating behaviours such as “shadow boxing.” This gradual deterioration ended in the Applicant pushing a staff member, which led to his transfer. [FACILITY 2] staff believe that the Applicant would benefit from the opportunity to work on peer relationship issues. I find that [FACILITY 1] has programming available that can assist the Applicant with these issues, and that the Applicant’s peer relationship needs can be met through his placement at [FACILITY 1].

Anger management needs.

10The incident of pushing a staff member at [FACILITY 2] shows that the Applicant has anger management issues and a need for improved behaviour control, as does the description of the Applicant’s deteriorating behaviour at [FACILITY 2]. [FACILITY 2] staff indicate that due to the Applicant’s educational and communication style, traditional anger management programming may not meet the Applicant’s needs. They suggest instead a modified and individualized approach for addressing the Applicant’s anger management needs. I understand from [FACILITY 1] staff that they do have anger management workbooks that they could work on with the Applicant on a one-to-one basis. I find that [FACILITY 1] is able to meet the Applicant’s anger management needs.

Substance use needs.

11The Applicant denies any concerns regarding substance use. In contrast, [FACILITY 2] staff note that the Applicant admits to some marijuana use, and that the Applicant was intoxicated during his crimes. This strongly suggests to me that the Applicant has needs in the area of substance use management. I understand that [FACILITY 1] has an ability to offer programming that would address substance use issues through booklets, activities, and one to one sessions with a social worker. I find that [FACILITY 1] is able to meet the Applicant’s needs for substance use programming.

Family connection needs.

12[FACILITY 2] staff indicated the Applicant has needs for family support. While at [FACILITY 2], the Applicant had regular contact with his father. Reports form [FACILITY 1] are that the Applicant is not in contact with his father, but that his sister has regular telephone contact with him. [FACILITY 2] staff strongly encouraged maintaining and strengthening these family supports in the hopes that they would encourage and motivate the Applicant to engage in programming and prosocial behaviour. They note that lack of family contact appeared to be associated with behavioural escalations for the Applicant, especially over the holidays, resulting in the incident where the Applicant pushed a staff member and was transferred to secure detention at [FACILITY 1]. Given the remoteness of the Applicant’s home community, and the travel challenges flowing from this distance, neither [FACILITY 1] staff nor [FACILITY 2] staff believed that there were any facilities closer to the Applicant’s home that might result in increased in person family connection for the Applicant. [FACILITY 1] is currently facilitating regular telephone contact, and there is an option for videoconferencing with family on weekends. [FACILITY 1] inform me that the Applicant’s brother is also placed at their facility resulting in family connection. I find that [FACILTY 1] is able to meet the Applicant’s needs for family contact.

Trauma counselling needs.

13[FACILITY 2] staff advise that the Applicant has experienced traumas in his life, however they did not go into any detail regarding the nature of these traumas out of a respect for the Applicant’s confidentiality. The Applicant did not identify trauma counselling needs as a need or issue. Despite this, given this need was noted by [FACILITY 2] staff, I include this need in my report. I find that [FACILITY 1] has social work staff who the Applicant can connect with for individualized counselling regarding trauma if the Applicant so desires. Based on this, I find that [FACILITY 1] is able to meet the Applicant’s needs for trauma counselling.

Cultural needs.

14As noted above, while the Applicant did not identify as Indigenous in his Application, he did confirm to me that he has Indigenous heritage, and this was confirmed by other information sources as well. I find that [FACILITY 1] has an indigenous cultural program with an indigenous cultural coordinator on staff from 9:00 am to 5:00 pm and offers indigenous rituals such as smudging. I understand from both the Applicant and staff that the Applicant is participating in smudging and other indigenous programming. I find that [FACILITY 1] is able to meet the Applicant’s cultural needs.

APPLICANT’S REQUEST FOR A RETURN TO [FACILITY 2]

15Section 152(1)(c) of the Child Youth and Family Services Act (“CYFSA”) provides the CFSRB with the authority to review a transfer from a place of open custody to a secure custody. This section of the CYFSA is applicable to this review as the Applicant was transferred from an open to a secure facility. I am limited in my ability to address this issue because the Level of Detention Assessment Report dated [date], that recommended a transfer to [FACILITY 1] did not have any check boxes completed on page 2, Section A Level of Detention Criteria to indicate why the Applicant was transferred. Despite this oversight, I am aware from my interviews with [FACILITY 2] and [FACILITY 1] staff that there was a gradual deterioration in the Applicant’s behaviour at [FACILITY 2] ending in an incident where the Applicant pushed a staff. This pattern, in conjunction with charges including assault with a weapon satisfy me that the Applicant’s needs are most appropriately met in a secure detention facility.

RECOMMENDATION

For the above reasons, I find that the Applicant’s needs are met in his current placement at [FACILITY 1]. I confirm the Provincial Director’s decision to place the Applicant at [FACILITY 1].

CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER

16Parties and their representatives must not use, share, discuss or disclose any CRB documents or decisions, or any other documents or information provided or used in this Application, with anyone including through the media or online. The CRB prohibits the use of any of this information for any purpose outside of the CRB’s proceedings, except with an order of the Court or the CRB, as appropriate.