1. Jordan’s Principle
Moving Forward

2. Jordan River Anderson Born in Norway House Cree Nation in 1999
Due to a serious medical condition and lack of services on-reserve, surrendered to provincial care
Stabilized at the age of two, but did not go into specialized foster home as federal and provincial governments could not agree who would pay
Passed away at the age of five, still in the hospital

3. House of Commons Motion 296
That, in the opinion of the House, the government should immediately adopt a child first principle, based on Jordan’s Principle, to resolve jurisdictional disputes involving the care of First Nations children Yeas: 262 ; Nays: 0

4. 2009: MOU on the Federal Response to Jordan’s Principle
Focused on cases involving a jurisdictional dispute between a provincial government and the federal government and on children with multiple disabilities requiring services from multiple service providers.
Fund to address Jordan’s Principle cases: $11 million
Jordan’s Principle cases accepted: 0

5. Truth and Reconciliation Commission Call to Action #3
We call upon all levels of government to fully implement Jordan’s Principle

6. Canadian Human Rights Tribunal 2016 CHRT 2 (Jan 26, 2016)
[…] Such an approach defeats the purpose of Jordan’s Principle and results in service gaps, delays and denials for First Nations children on reserve.
AANDC is also ordered to cease applying its narrow definition of Jordan’s Principle and to take measures to immediately implement the full meaning and scope of Jordan’s Principle

7. Canadian Human Rights Tribunal 2016 CHRT 10 (Apr 26, 2016)
[…] The order is to “immediately implement”, not immediately start discussions to review the definition in the long-term.
[…] the Panel orders INAC to immediately consider Jordan’s Principle as including all jurisdictional disputes (this includes disputes between federal government departments) and involving all First Nations children (not only those with multiple disabilites).

8. Jordan’s Principle Child First Intiative (July 6, 2016)
Focused on First Nations children with a disability or short-term condition (initially limited to children living on-reserve)
Limited to health or social services within the normative standard of care in the province/territory of residence
Fund to address Jordan’s Principle cases: $327 million
Fund for “Enhanced Service Coordination: $38 million
Jordan’s Principle cases accepted (July 2016 to February 2017): 3,281

9. Canadian Human Rights Tribunal 2017 CHRT 14 (May 26, 2017)
[…] Canada’s definition of Jordan’s Principle does not fully address the findings in the Decision and is not sufficiently responsive to the previous orders of this Panel.
While Canada has indeed broadened its application of Jordan’s Principle since the Decision […] it nevertheless continues to narrow the application of the principle to certain First Nations children

10. Canadian Human Rights Tribunal 2017 CHRT 14 (May 26, 2017)
[…] the emphasis on the “normative standard of care” or “comparable services” […] does not answer the findings in the Decision with respect to substantive equality and the need for culturally appropriate services
[…] the needs of each individual child must be considered and evaluated

11. 2017 CHRT 14 Definition Ordered
Jordan’s Principle applies equally to all First Nations children
Jordan’s Principle applies to all government services
Where the service meets the normative standard, the government department of first contact pays for the service without case conferencing or other administrative steps
Where the service beyond the normative standard, the government department of first contact will evaluate the child’s individual needs to determine if the service should be provided to ensure substantive equality

12. Canadian Human Rights Tribunal 2017 CHRT 35 (November 2, 2017)
Canada files for judicial review in Federal Court on June 25, 2017, challenging the process ordered by the Tribunal
Parties agree to amendments to 2017 CHRT 14, to allow for clinical case conferencing where further information is reasonably necessary to understand the First Nations child’s clinical needs
All other cases most be resolved within the following timeframes:
Urgent cases involving irremediable harm: Immediately
Urgent individual cases: 12 hours
Urgent group cases: 48 hours
Individual cases: 48 hours
Group cases: 1 week

13. Performance since 2017 CHRT 35
111,843 requests approved from July 6, 2016 to July 31, 2018
FY 2016/17: 4,940 requests approved
FY 2017/18: 76,891 requests approved
FY 2018/19 (to July 31): 30,012 requests approved

14. Performance since 2017 CHRT 35
Continuing areas of concern
Definition of “First Nations child”
Integration of “best interest of the child” consideration
Procedure for identifying and responding to urgent cases
Focal Point focus on service gaps rather than substantive equality

15. Performance since 2017 CHRT 35
Continuing areas of concern
Unnecessary requests for information
Escalation to Headquarters
Service Standard Compliance
Appeals process

16. Performance since 2017 CHRT 35
Service standard compliance – large variability
Monthly averages vary from 51% to 90% (below 80% since February 2018)
High variability within provinces
Alberta 94% in Jan ’18 to 16% in May ’18
High variability between provinces
Manitoba 90% in July ’18 to Quebec 34% in July ’18

17. Performance since 2017 CHRT 35
High number of cases escalated to Headquarters
April – July 2018: 580 cases escalated (170 denied)
Escalation to Headquarters causes delays
April 2018: 1.3% of cases within service standard
May 2018: 39.8% of cases within service standard
June 2018: 7.2% of cases within service standard
July 2018: 5.0% of cases within service standard

18. Performance since 2017 CHRT 35
Low number of appeals April to July 2018
8 appeals (6 allowed; 2 denied)

19. Implementation and Next Steps
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal Oversight
Consultation Committee on Child Welfare (CHRT)
Jordan’s Principle Operational Committee (ISC)
Jordan’s Principle Action Table (NAC)

20. Activity in the Provinces
Alberta
Health Minister endorses Jordan’s Principle (2017)
Child intervention action plan commits to full implementation of Jordan’s Principle in 2018/19
Ontario – 2017
- New Child and Family Services Act, 2017 preamble endorses Jordan’s Principle and provides for regulations to resolve inter-jurisdictional and intra-jurisdicitonal disputes in respect of services under the Act

21. Questions?
1-855-JP-CHILD