2009
Legislative Session: First Session, 39th Parliament
COMMITTEE A BLUES
This is a DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY of debate in one sitting of the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia. This transcript is subject to corrections, and will be replaced by the final, official Hansard report. Use of this transcript, other than in the legislative precinct, is not protected by parliamentary privilege, and public attribution of any of the debate as transcribed here could entail legal liability.
(HANSARD)
PROCEEDINGS IN THE
DOUGLAS FIR ROOM
Committee of Supply
ESTIMATES: MINISTRY OF
CHILDREN AND FAMILY DEVELOPMENT
(continued)
The House in Committee of Supply (Section A); H. Bloy in the chair.
The committee met at 10:07 a.m.
On Vote 19: ministry operations, $1,394,139,000 (continued).
M. Karagianis: We left off yesterday in discussions about the various cuts and changes to program delivery around the province. I do have a colleague here that wishes to ask questions specifically pertaining to that, and then I'll return to the line of questioning that we were pursuing. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
G. Coons: Good morning, Minister and staff. Nice to see you. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I just want to talk about the provincial advisers that were in lots of people's minds –– a cut to direct service, even though the minister has said that there were going to be no changes to services at all and no interruption in services for families receiving the infant development program. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
She did talk about the — preying upon the fears of those who receive the services. Again, the minister knows…. She's been to Prince Rupert. I'm not too sure if she's been to Haida Gwaii or down to the central coast –– a very unique, diverse and challenging region to try to serve children with special needs and deal with not only the infant development programs but also the aboriginal components of that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I do have a couple of concerns from every part of my riding –– in Prince Rupert, on Haida Gwaii, and stretching right down into Bella Coola. The Healthy Beginnings program with the Nuxalk Nation, down in Bella Coola…. Gail Moody is the coordinator of that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
There's just a bit of a note here that I want to put on record –– that Healthy Beginnings has concerns that "if the provincial adviser office goes, we will be without the technical supports necessary to do our job." [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1010]
"Many parents in the Bella Coola valley seek advice and direction from the IDP and the SCD in their search for answers. We were disappointed to learn that the advisers were abruptly dismissed by MCFD with no knowledge of their work of many years." They say that apparently there is no consultation with advisory workers and no analysis on impact on client services. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I'm just wondering: was there consultation with the advisory workers prior to the cut, and was a client services impact analysis done? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: First, just to provide a clarification again around the positions. The positions that are affected are the two provincial adviser positions and their immediate support staff. Those who work out of those offices as coordinators, consultants — they have various descriptions for their jobs — those positions remain, and they will remain. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Certainly, with respect to the Nuxalk Nation and their concern about Healthy Beginnings and that program, they will continue to be provided with the kind of support and advice that they could expect in the past from the provincial adviser's office, because those people who would have been providing that advice will remain in place. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In terms of the aboriginal adviser, it's important to note that that position has not been eliminated. We have extended that contract to the end of the fiscal year, and our intent there is to review the activities of that office to determine whether or not we indeed need to continue that position. We recognize that the aboriginal programs are not nearly as well developed as those that are providing service in the mainstream community, such as the infant development program, generally, and supported child development. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
When it comes to the way in which these changes were handled, yes, it would have come as a surprise to the individuals, but they were not summarily dismissed or anything of the like. Their contracts were not renewed. Their contracts were up for renewal on the dates when these things were dealt with. While it would have been a surprise to them, they certainly were not summarily dismissed. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We recognize the value of the work that they have provided to communities and on behalf of the ministry for a number of years. But what we recognize is our need to be able to provide all the dollars we can to the very front-line, direct services that affect parents and families every day. We are able to realize a $600,000 savings that will go directly back into those services, because the budget for both infant development programs and supported child development not only has not been cut but has actually been increased. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
So with that, we are expecting that the policy and advisory functions that were performed by the provincial advisers themselves can adequately be performed by the ministry and that, with respect to working with the coordinators and consultants, that role can be fulfilled at the regional level. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
G. Coons: Yeah, even though it may not have been a surprise, and their contract ran out, it was after 35 years of providing service to families who have infants with special needs — 35 years. To find out, the day prior to your contract running out, that you aren't going to be providing those services anymore is a real shock, not only to the advisers but to the hundreds of support networks throughout the province, I believe, Minister. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1015]
I did ask you about…. Gail Moody had a question about the client services impact analysis. Was there an analysis done on the impacts that it would have on all of the programs, especially in remote communities? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: It's important to note a couple of things. First of all, the advisers were not let go and shunted out of the office immediately upon being announced that their contracts were not being renewed. In fact, the infant development provincial adviser will remain in place until the end of December, and we continue to work with her around the transition planning for this. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
As well, the supported child development adviser stays in place for a month after the end of the contract. Certainly, while these announcements would have been a surprise to the individuals, we have continued to work with them to ensure a smooth transition. We certainly appreciate the work that they have done on behalf of the ministry over the years. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
But that length of time that their positions existed also tells another story, and that is that these positions are historical. They began at a time when these programs were in their infancy and when there certainly wasn't the type of infrastructure that exists currently within the ministry. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
As you will likely be aware, we are continuing our move to decentralize the work that we do in the ministry. That means that we are quite confident that along with the enhanced role of our regions in terms of coordinating services in their areas and along with the transfer of child and youth special needs services to the regions and the staff that accompany those, that front-line service will not be impacted. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
There was no formal study done with respect to the provincial advisers, nor would I expect there to be, given that this is part of the ongoing staff movement that will take place as we move to respond to various reports around the Ministry for Children and Family Development that have highlighted the importance of enhancing the regional role, as we plan for and deliver services not only for special needs kids but for kids in care and for other children and families in those areas. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We're quite confident that the policy and advisory role that the advisers have played can be fulfilled through a combination of our provincial office and then, in terms of coordination, at our individual regional offices. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1020]
Again, I want to remind the member that the infrastructure from those offices, in the form of the coordinators and consultants, remains in place and that the only positions affected are the provincial advisers themselves — that's two people — and their immediate support staff. If I'm correct, I understand that they each had two support staff to assist them in their offices, but they were not providing direct service to families. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
G. Coons: I realize that the minister understands the complexity of remote and rural communities. The major concern from Prince Rupert…. We canvassed this in question period, about the Prince Rupert concerns. There are some on Haida Gwaii, where they talk about…. The provincial adviser position is not a layer of bureaucracy. For 30 years it supported families and the consultants every day on issues like best-practice guidelines, ongoing education, constant self-program-evaluation, enforcement of standards. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The concern that I'm hearing — and it's the front-line workers that are writing to the minister and to me — is looking at services to aboriginal kids through those programs and guaranteeing that a family that moves from a Vancouver program to a program on Haida Gwaii or in Bella Coola or Prince Rupert will receive the same level of expertise, support and care. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It's the front-line workers that are concerned with the support they have due to the remoteness of where they are working, as the minister knows, as she's travelled around. A major concern is added support, especially for aboriginal infant development consultants and the like. Throughout the region there are questions of whether or not there would be any added support for the aboriginal programs dealing with the components of the loss of the provincial advisers. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: First, note that these are two positions where the contracts are not being renewed, along with their administrative support staff. The services that they provide are not being eliminated. What is changing should actually serve to enhance services to rural communities. In fact, the provincial advisers were certainly not located in the north. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The move that we will be making, to have the regions providing the consultative services that would have been provided in the past, actually brings those services closer to the areas that you and your constituents are concerned about. It actually should result in an improvement in terms of the service that they receive insofar as being able to consult and have the kind of advice that's necessary to them. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1025]
When it comes to the overall nature of managing this, in terms of staff, one of the changes that will assist us in providing better service is the fact that we are now in the midst of the transfer of child and youth special needs services from Community Living B.C. to the Ministry of Children and Family Development. That results in about 167 staff moving over. It provides us with an infrastructure of support for children and youth with special needs and for the programs that go with that that we have not had prior to this. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
That will also result in the regions now having a dedicated children and youth with special needs manager in each of the areas. So again, it's bringing the services that you're speaking about much closer to the areas that your constituents are concerned about. That, to us, is a net positive. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We want those serving agencies to have very close interaction with our regional offices and vice versa so that we can meet the specific needs of their area rather than having a faraway provincial view as to what services they are being provided. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
G. Coons: Yes. Kimberley Larocque from the Haida Gwaii infant development program is a coordinator there who had the concerns about equal opportunity throughout the province for children with special needs, and she wanted to reconsider the cutting of the backbone of a program that has recognition across the world. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It's difficult at this point in time for the front-line workers in small rural communities like Prince Rupert, on Haida Gwaii, in the central coast and throughout the province to have faith and confidence in the move when they're still trying to grasp this, especially…. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The minister knows for sure that when programs are cut, whether they're sports or arts or legal aid or autism programs, in larger communities the slack is taken up by other support groups or agencies or networks and that in small communities there are no support networks to take up the slack. So it's felt right to the heart of the community, and in the Healthy Beginnings in the Nuxalk Nation, they have five programs that depend on this support. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
My last question, again, is dealing with the five consultants out of Prince Rupert who had concerns: Anne Falvo, who is the supported child development consultant; Sharlene Wilson, the aboriginal supported child development coordinator; Shirley Duchscherer, the infant development consultant; Sandra Swan, the infant development consultant; Leona Peardon, the aboriginal infant development consultant. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
They are expressing their concerns at what's going to happen — not only in the Prince Rupert, Haida Gwaii and the central coast but throughout the province — when these changes or cuts to these programs start to become a reality. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
There is one thing that was happening in Prince Rupert. The SCD office was helping with training and was attended by participants from Prince Rupert, Terrace, Kitimat, surrounding villages and the provincial offices through their development funds. It was halfway through a training program that looked at FASD — promoting function and participation and family-centred practice and looking at behavioural concerns and mental health issues. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Dana Brynelsen, the adviser, was key to organizing the next phase. So the question from the region — right from Haida Gwaii through to Terrace, Kitimat and Prince Rupert — is: what is the status of this training with the loss of Dana's position, and who will organize the next phase for the region? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: I'll start in reverse order. With respect to that specific training program that the member is inquiring about, I will endeavour to find out about that specific program for you and will get you some information about that, hopefully, very quickly. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1030]
But I want to reiterate that the program is not being cut. None of these services are being cut — okay? The budget is increasing for both infant development and for supported child development. In fact, the funding for infant development programming is at an all-time high. The funding for supported child development has gone up from about $37.7 million in '04-05 to now $57 million this year. None of these programs, none of these services, are being cut. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The coordinators and consultants of which the member speaks are not being cut. This is about two positions. They are provincial advisor positions. They had with them administrative support staff. Those are the only positions in question, and the services that they have provided will now be provided through our provincial ministry office and through the regions. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The coordinating work that the consultants and coordinators do will continue uninterrupted. There will not be disruption for families. There will not be disruption for agencies. We continue to work with the provincial adviser for infant development programs and also with the provincial adviser for supported child development programs to ensure that there is a smooth transition as the ministry takes over, through its provincial office and its regional office, the very services that will continue. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
To repeat: the programs are not being cut, and the services are not being cut. The difference is in who will provide them and where they will be located when they provide them. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I'm sure that my colleague will send that information forward to the minister so that she has those letters available. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I would like to ask just a couple more questions around this issue of changes in service and cuts to things like the EIBI program. I have in front of me here a letter that was sent to the minister. It talks about a specific individual family and their issues around direct funding versus the invoicing program. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I think it really highlights a concern that I hope the minister can answer. In this particular case…. I know that the minister has a copy of the letter from a Ms. Susan Anthony about her situation. She is currently undergoing some health challenges as a result of breast cancer and chemotherapy, but she does highlight here very specific concern around the shift from direct funding to invoiced funding. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
She says that her son's behavioural psychologist requires same-day payment, and I've heard repeatedly across the whole array of family concerns here that the shift from the kind of funding that many of them have been managing up to this point has presented some anxieties around the fact that if the government is going to do invoiced payments now, there could be as much as a 30-day-or-greater lag in payment time because of the way government pays these invoices. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Could the minister talk about what will happen in the case of these services — for instance, for Susan Anthony and for other families who also have service providers, psychologists or others that demand instant payment? In the case of Susan Anthony, she does not have the financial capacity to cover those costs out of pocket herself. She's very concerned about the lag time, and perhaps the minister could address this. I'm sure it's an issue she's hearing from many families. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1035]
Hon. M. Polak: While I won't speak about the specific case, I can speak to the situation that the individuals find themselves in. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It is common for those who are in that particular field, be they psychologists or many other professionals, to demand, from an individual, same-day payment for service. However, in our experience in the office, when the service provider is aware that there is assured payment — from government, WCB or extended health — then they are willing to change that practice because they are assured of payment. Because there's an established relationship there beyond that of just the individual, there's assured payment. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We are quite happy — and have done many times — to contact the service provider directly. In following up on cases like this, that is our practice, and we have not had any experiences where the service provider has declined to accept a guarantee of payment from government in cases like that. We anticipate being able to resolve any concerns or complaints like this as we make this transition to invoice payment. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I should also add that about a third of our families currently are on invoice payments. We are now meeting the 30-day target quite well, and in fact, our average right now is about 15 days for turnaround of payment. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: These families that are very concerned now — who would they contact to get some assurance about this or to make those arrangements for the ministry to talk directly to their psychologist or service provider? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Every one of the families concerned has received a letter from the Ministry of Children and Family Development. They have been provided with information about the transition to invoice payment, as well as contact information both for the website and for a toll-free 1-800 number. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
As they approach the transition date…. This is being phased. It's happening on the anniversary of each child's contract, so that would be on their birthdate. As they are approaching that date, our autism funding unit makes contact with the family and then works with them to transition to the invoice payment process. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I would like to just ask one more question in this area of program funding and then move into some questions about Community Living. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Has the ministry done an analysis on what the HST impact is going to be on all of these services to families, and is that compensated for in any of the funding this year? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Well, as I've said publicly on a few occasions, we do not anticipate any impact to families with respect to HST in invoice payment, but HST questions broadly should be canvassed with the Minister of Finance. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I'm actually looking specifically at whether or not the ministry has analyzed what the impacts will be to programs like foster parenting. You know, there's a specific funding formula for foster parents. HST is certainly going to add to the costs for those families looking after children. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Right across the range of services that the ministry is responsible for, HST will have impact on all of the families. How is this affecting your decisions on funding and whether or not you'll increase funding — say, to foster families — to compensate for HST? Has that analysis been done on all the various impacts of this harmonized sales tax on children, families and certainly on those that are receiving funding from government? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1040]
Hon. M. Polak: As with any ministry in government, we have been involved in analyzing that, just as any other ministry has done, with the Ministry of Finance. So questions around the HST and its impact on government services are properly directed toward the Minister of Finance. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Will the Minister of Finance, then, be able to answer my questions whether the funding for foster families will increase? Is that that minister's decision, or is it this minister's responsibility around how foster families are funded? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: HST is not applicable until July. We will have a March budget before that time, and questions specifically related to increases to foster families at that time can be addressed. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Is government not planning for that ahead of time, then? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The Chair: Member, all questions should be directed towards the budget Vote 19 on the budget estimates for '09-10. The HST is not in effect until July. Thank you, Member. Continue. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Thank you very much, hon. Chair. I'm surprised that the government is so hesitant to answer questions on HST and all these ministry questions. I've seen right across the estimates that this has been a difficult topic to discuss. However, I'll move into Community Living questions at this point. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I would like to just ask generally…. I know we talked a little bit about the budget for Community Living and what's being left behind in the Ministry of Housing and Social Development versus the funding that's coming here, but the transition of those services back into ministry hands –– could the minister please give me a status update on all the transition of services? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Well, I'm pleased to say that the transfer has been fully implemented. It took place on October 31. The staff have moved over. The services have moved over. Letters have gone to all families –– about 12,000 of them across the province. We've met with stakeholders along through the process. There is also a 1-800 number if there are individuals out there who have any questions or concerns about their particular file. I'm advised that at this stage we have yet to have anyone call or utilize the 1-800 number. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
This certainly took an awful lot of planning and work amongst both our ministry and Housing and Social Development to create such a smooth transition. We're certainly monitoring as we go in the early days to ensure that if there are any challenges for service providers or for families out there, we're catching those. But as yet, things seem to be going smoothly. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In fact, we just released, on November 4, our cross-ministry protocol. That was signed between nine ministries and deals with the transition from childhood services to adult services, so in terms of status, the transition appears to have gone very, very well and was complete on October 31. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1045]
M. Karagianis: The minister alluded, in her opening remarks, to some responsibility for adult services. Can the minister explain exactly what those responsibilities are? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: It is typically the transition from youth services to adult services. The only adult proper services that we would have would be those dealing with youth formally in care who are aged 19 to 24, and those would be in the area of youth education — the YEAF funding. Beyond that, I am sorry if I made too much of the adult portion. That would be the only place in which we intersect with adult services. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: That's a little bit more reassuring, then, because I see that the vast amount of funding remained with the Housing and Social Development Ministry, and really a very small, modest amount of funding came with this. I was very concerned about how adult services were going to fit into the Children and Families Ministry. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
This process now of moving Community Living responsibilities out to an independent body and then back in and, obviously, splitting it along the way, leaving part of it — the adult services — with Housing and Social Development, part of this coming back…. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Has the ministry looked at the cost of that whole process? It's only been a few years since all of the services were moved out into this independent model, and now they're being split up and moved back into ministry responsibility. Has there been an analysis of the cost of this process of out and then back in? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: There were no transitional costs or associated costs with respect to that work. It was conducted by those who are already in the employ at senior and middle management levels, so there was no impact with respect to the financial aspect of the Ministry of Children and Family Development. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Insofar as transferring the funds, essentially, the funds technically never left the Ministry of Children and Family Development. We managed them on behalf of those who were managing Community Living B.C. When the shift happened in the first place, we continued to manage the funding for them. Again, the financial impact on the ministry was neutral. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: So the staffing at Community Living B.C., when it was an independent body…. Are all of those staff coming over? I know that the minister mentioned 167 staff. Is that everyone that was employed there? Were those individuals transferred out of the ministry originally, when CLBC was created as an independent body? They've been transferred out and transferred back in. Is that how that staffing has occurred? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1050]
Hon. M. Polak: Generally speaking, that's correct. When the change was made to have children services moved to CLBC, essentially ministry staff then were transferred over to CLBC. Now that we are receiving those services back into MCFD, staff are transferring back. That, though, of course, is conducted through a preferencing system — and, in this case, many months of planning and identifying which staff — that we agreed to with the BCGEU, CLBC and the PSA. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Was there any change in staffing levels through this transition, or has it always been 167 people moving back and forth? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: I don't have the precise numbers, but the number actually has increased modestly. That's consistent with caseload increases and increased budgets to support those caseloads. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I'd like to ask some questions now about some of the other functions of CLBC. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
There has been a significant vacancy in information around wait-list numbers. CLBC has not put out wait-list information. Can the minister talk about what the current wait-lists are for services, and will that information be part of the ministry responsibilities now? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I know that we talked yesterday about the quality assurance. I would assume that extends to CLBC. It would be very important to know the kinds of wait-lists that exist and what kind of time frame those families are expected to be on that wait-list. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: With respect to the CLBC wait-list and how that is managed, that would be a question to be canvassed with the Minister of Housing and Social Development. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
With regard to how we will manage going forward, that would be similar to what we spoke about yesterday with other programs, where we will employ a priority assessment. In other words, there won't be a static wait-list because we will always be responding to those needs assessed of a child that would take priority over another. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
So it wouldn't be a static wait-list. It would be one where we are consistently employing a priority assessment to make sure that those children who most need the services are always the ones who are first in line for them. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1055]
M. Karagianis: Without discussing the wait-list for adult services — because you're right; that's not what we're here to discuss — but for children, is the minister saying that there will be no wait-list for services for special needs children? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: There won't be a wait-list in the sense that one that might expect if one was applying to rent an apartment or something like that, where it's simply…. Once you're on the wait-list and you're No. 3, you move up when No. 1 and No. 2 are gone. It won't be a wait-list like that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It will be handled based on priority assessment, and so, necessarily, it won't remain the same. It won't be static. If a new child were to enter our system and need services, and if they had a higher priority need than children who are already on a wait-list of whatever type, then that child would be moved up. It will be a constant assessment of priority amongst children so that those who have the highest need would be receiving the services first. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I know that one of the things that the ministry has been concerned about is working on this new functional-based assessment. Is that what the minister is talking about at this point? Is this the functional-based assessment that families have been waiting for? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: No, it is not the same thing. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Can the minister please advise me on what the status is of the functional-based assessment process to determine eligibility for children-with-special-needs services? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: When it comes to services for special needs children, there is no hard gate on eligibility the way that there is for adult services. So there is a difference between what we would call eligibility versus what we would call priority. We're looking at providing services on a needs basis to children, and again, there is no hard gate on that as there is for adult services. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1100]
[J. Thornthwaite in the chair.]
When it comes to their priority on the list, that's a different matter. The determination of their eligibility is not hard-and-fast, as it is with adult services. Where they are on the priority list is relative to who is on the list at any given time. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Sorry, I should just finish by saying that that is not the same as the new assessment tool, because in this case we're talking about work that we're doing cross-ministry through the child and youth special needs framework. Again, there's no hard gate on eligibility when it comes to children's services. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I'm a little bit concerned here, then, if there is no real sort of eligibility process. The minister says that there are no wait-lists anymore because those are being assessed for priority at all times. I mean, there are some 7,000 children waiting for autism services. Where do they fit into this picture? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: First, just to highlight a distinction: autism services are very different and distinct from pretty much any other special needs services that are provided because the services are not provided by the ministry. Autism is handled through financial assistance to families, and there is no wait-list for that. That happens immediately upon a diagnosis. So we do not maintain wait-lists for that, because there are not any. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
When it comes to what we are describing in terms of our service to children and youth with special needs…. If we were to try to maintain a wait-list that could be published, we would literally be changing it each and every day because of new circumstances with children and because we take in new children every day. So the way in which we manage it is that agencies will often address wait-list pressures by being in consultation with waiting families. If they see changes, or if it becomes apparent to them that there is an immediate need, they will often provide service through other services that they have outside of the one that the family is waiting for. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It doesn't entirely replace what would be the best, which is if we could get them into their chosen or their correct service immediately. But certainly, they are not left simply to fend for themselves. Again, it just isn't a traditional wait-list process, because we recognize the need to get services to these families, to these kids, as quickly as we possibly can and to make sure that we're constantly aware of where the priorities are and to make sure that the children who need those services the most are the ones who receive them first. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I know that select parent advisory groups met with the ministry last November and talked about this issue of changes to how special needs services were going to be delivered and talked very specifically about this new functional-based assessment practice process. Has the minister said that that's now gone, that's disappeared, and that those conversations resulted in no decision around creating this new process? That's certainly what the parent advisory groups understood — that there was a new eligibility assessment process coming. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1105]
They want to know at this point where that stands in the ministry's current decisions as they move forward with the responsibilities for CLBC. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: The discussion of functional assessment and the pursuit of it is part of ongoing work as we continue to respond to the work that we do now with children and youth with special needs, as we continue to pursue the cross-ministry work that has been agreed to in our children and youth with special needs framework. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Functional assessment is part of the basket of services that we would be taking a look at. We'd also be pursuing things such as the mapping project from BCACDI, which the member mentioned yesterday, and bringing all that information together to consistently and constantly improve the services that we're providing. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
But it's important to note that functional assessment is not about eligibility. Functional assessment is about determining the best available service to meet that child's needs. Really, it is a combination of not only the identified needs of the child but also the available services in whatever area they are at. All of those things work in concert, and they are what we are working toward in the ministry now that we do have the responsibility for children and youth with special needs and as we pursue the cross-ministry framework with Health and with others. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I'm glad to hear that this functional assessment is, in fact, not about eligibility. That's really what the families were…. Their understanding, coming out of the meeting, is that that's what the new functional assessment process was going to be about, eligibility. I'm really glad to hear that it's not, that it's really about just assessing level of service and urgency of service, and all of that. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I want to talk a little bit about IQ testing, though. I've actually had some parents very concerned about IQ testing for children as young as three as part of their assessment. Would the minister like to comment on that? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Insofar as MCFD's work with children and youth with special needs, it will not involve IQ testing, nor I believe has it ever. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: That's good news for families as well. There's been a great deal of concern about how you would even begin to test a three-year-old with Down syndrome or other conditions for IQ eligibility. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1110]
On the other end of that spectrum, the minister talked about the transition to adult services. I know that an order-in-council was delivered on this issue of IQ 70 as a criteria for eligibility for services for children transitioning into adulthood. It's been very controversial, and it's been canvassed frequently, I think, in the House. I know that there was an indication from the minister that will be responsible for the adult services that there's going to be a revision of that. Obviously, the transition is important — that IQ testing is done before special needs youth become adults. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Can the minister talk about when that process will change? What's the timeline for that, and what will the criteria be now for determining how youth transition into adulthood and are still kept safe and provided with adequate services? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: With respect to the criteria for eligibility that would be in place for a young person transitioning to adult services, that would be something to canvass with the Minister of Housing and Social Development. However, in terms of our work in MCFD, what we endeavour to do — and we now have a cross-ministry protocol to make this much easier — is to identify early on, in fact, years prior to a child reaching 19…. We attempt to identify those who are likely to be in need of ongoing adult services, and we work together with Housing and Social Development, with Community Living B.C., because often both are providing services. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We do that now through the announced protocol, which takes in nine government agencies and has been recently signed. We can provide the member with a copy of that protocol if she would be interested. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I would be very interested in seeing that, and I thank the minister for that offer. But I certainly know that the issue around IQ testing…. I'm assuming that that is done prior to their 19th birthday. So whose responsibility is it to follow through on the order-in-council that was established? Are children with special needs tested on their 19th birthday, as they become adults? I would assume that's a bit of a clumsy process — trying to ensure that. So at what stage is that done? Whose responsibility is it to make that determination? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It would seem to me that for the ministry to — suddenly, at the age of 19 — simply let go of all responsibility for those individuals and then whatever the process is that occurs for eligibility or to meet this criteria to receive adult services in the Ministry of Housing…. I would expect that, as the minister said, years ahead there is preparation for those who are obviously high need. But this question of the 70 IQ…. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1115]
Frankly, I have worked with the community. I have done respite with individuals who probably do have IQs over 70 but who, in many cases, are nonverbal, are frequently victims of episodes because of changes in the environment — stress, noise, things like that. Some of them would certainly qualify to have IQs over 70, but most certainly are unable to care for themselves independently — hence, the need for respite for families who are currently looking after those individuals. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
So I have a grave concern about where the trigger is for this 70 IQ, because it is not, in my own experience, any determining factor that tells you a full-range picture of the children. As the minister said, these children are evaluated well before they become adults to say who is high need, who is not. It seems to me that the order-in-council that establishes in any way that a 70 IQ is a criteria for anything is very troublesome. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I would expect that the ministry, having this extraordinary care for these individuals right until the day of their 19th birthday, would certainly be the first place that you might determine whether this OIC is enforced by your ministry. Or at what stage? What's the trigger to enforce that? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: When it comes to how the services are divided, the Ministry of Children and Family Development has the sole responsibility for children with special needs and the services that they are provided. But when it comes to the adult sector, it's much broader than that. It isn't just the Ministry of Housing and Social Development or Community Living B.C. There's also Advanced Education and Labour Market Development, Education, Health Services, Housing and Social Development, Public Safety and Solicitor General, B.C. Housing, Community Living B.C., the Public Guardian and Trustee. There are many, many others. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
So what we've done with the new protocol is ensure that the Ministry of Children and Family Development folks are determining the needs of the child early on so that those dialogues can begin to take place, and we can then determine what the most appropriate service provider is for them as they go forward into their adult years. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It isn't just related to services provided through CLBC or Housing and Social Development. There can be many others that come into play here in terms of providing service to that young person who is reaching adulthood. By identifying that much earlier on, we're better able to match them with the appropriate service. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In terms of the OIC or the appropriateness of it or what the future of it might be, that would be appropriately canvassed with the Minister of Housing and Social Development. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: So if the minister could just correct me, then, on this. It is not the MCFD that administers the IQ-70 test criteria? That's done at what point? At what point in the transition for special needs youth into adulthood is that criteria implemented? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1120]
Hon. M. Polak: It used to be in the past that if one from MCFD were to go to CLBC and say, "We have this young person who's 14 or 15. We believe they're going to need service when they are 19," the response typically would be: "Well, then come back when they're 19, and that's when we'll deal with it." [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The difference that you will see now, in particular through the current protocol that we've just signed, is that a facilitator becomes involved with that family, with MCFD. That facilitator is from Community Living B.C. We are able, most often, to identify the potential for that young person to require adult services, usually around the age of 14 or 15, and begin to work with the family and with that young person at that stage. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It's one of the reasons, though, that the services for adults are much broader in terms of the number of different agencies and the type of service. As we go through that process — and it's quite collaborative now, under the new protocol — if there are issues around eligibility, CLBC would then be managing that, together with the family, through the facilitator. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
For our role in this, we would not conduct IQ testing. Our role is to ensure that we've assisted in identifying the array of services that would be available for this young person and identifying which of those would best meet that young person's needs. At the end of the day, the management of criteria for eligibility for CLBC and Housing and Social Development programs specifically would still remain the responsibility of that ministry. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
For the others, they may or may not have their own eligibility requirements. Again, we attempt to identify any potential barriers that might exist early on so that we can work with the facilitator and work through our ministry to ensure that they're connected with the appropriate service once they reach their 19th birthday. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1125]
M. Karagianis: Would the Ministry of Children and Families' determination of the needs for service and level of service take precedence over other criteria, like this IQ testing of 70? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
For instance, if it was determined through a facilitator that a youth was very likely to be in need of a high level or moderate level of care and support, does that take precedence over this criteria for a 70-IQ threshold? Who gets the call, then, on what the final determination is on how services are provided once the child turns 19? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: The short answer is that the Ministry of Housing and Social Development retains responsibility through CLBC for managing of their own criteria, but that indeed is the short answer in terms of statutory responsibility. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The role of this protocol is to ensure that we never get to that point, and it's important to note that it's only Community Living B.C. that utilizes the IQ 70 in any way, shape or form. It is our role as a ministry to work with the facilitator and with the family to identify what the needs of that young person may be as they go forward into young adulthood and to connect them with services that would be across the piece in terms of the agencies that I referenced before. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It would be possible that they would be receiving services from an array of those different agencies and ministries. Typically, it would not just be one, but it could be. But the net result of this protocol and the way in which we work together is that there would not be a young adult who would be without service. If they were not provided service through CLBC, they would be provided service through any one of those other numbers of agencies and ministries. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: The 70-IQ determination certainly was something that was put in place by order-in-council by the government. You're right. It is only being used by CLBC and only since the government enforced it by order-in-council. Before that, it was something that was problematic, but I know that the minister has alluded to something else coming. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Is that this new protocol? When does this protocol take effect? Will that mean that the order-in-council determining that a 70 IQ would be a determining factor will no longer be viable — will be rescinded? Certainly, it would seem, by what the minister is saying, that that no longer becomes a viable criteria under the terms of this protocol, if it is to be fully implemented. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1130]
Hon. M. Polak: The protocol is in place now, as is the OIC. It remains in place. The protocol governs how we will act amongst our different ministries and agencies to ensure that there is no gap left in service for those young people who are transitioning to adulthood. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
In terms of the OIC and the IQ 70, again, that is best canvassed with the Ministry of Housing and Social Development. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Despite the protocol and all the best plans, the OIC is still in place and will stay in place, so that can be used as a determining factor to severely alter whatever plan youth may have or family may have. Once the child turns 19, it could be determined by the order-in-council that IQ 70 then changes the entire direction of their services and supports, as it is doing right now, to great distress for families. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I guess we'll have to see how effective the protocol will be. If in fact there's a wall at the end of the road at 19, all bets are off, because an IQ could determine a complete change in the services provided to young people. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I do want to ask about performance measures in all of this, though. We talked a little bit yesterday about quality assurance. I would be interested to see exactly what the scope of quality assurance is in determining performance measures for outcomes in Community Living. There hasn't been a lot of consistency under CLBC's model previous to coming back into the ministry. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Is there a performance measure criterion for determining how successful this new model, new protocol and new-found responsibility are for CLBC under MCFD? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: First, I just want to address the comments around the role of IQ 70 with respect to our planning for young people entering adulthood. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It wouldn't alter their plans one bit, because the whole idea of the protocol is that we are working side by side with CLBC and with the eight other agencies and ministries who are part of the protocol so that there would be no surprises. All the way along everything would be planned with knowledge of things such as the criteria for CLBC. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
The criteria for CLBC are just that: it's for CLBC alone. There are a range of services for adults with special needs that don't touch CLBC at all. But all of the planning all the way through would be done, recognizing what various eligibility requirements there were for whatever programs were out there. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
This gives certainty to families. There wouldn't be changes, because we would be aware of both the young person's needs and our capacity to provide support all the way through. When they reach 19, there would already be a plan in place for what services are going to be provided for them. Whether or not those are through CLBC, they would still receive service. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
When it comes to performance measures, one of the values of having children and youth with special needs now being brought back into MCFD is that we will be able to include that as a component of what we do in our overall work as a ministry. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1135]
You'll be aware that as we work through the transformation of our ministry, we are taking a look at children and families along a continuum as opposed to having them siloed into specific categories. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
What we anticipate through our enhanced quality assurance, now that we have a team developing that along with our Strong, Safe and Supported operational plan, is that we would then be able to take a look at every child with whom we come into contact, whether they are children in care or whether they are receiving services as children and youth with special needs. We would be able to take a look at the outcomes in all areas for each of those individual children that we have had responsibility for in one way or another to provide service. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
It's part of our overall new framework that we are implementing through Strong, Safe and Supported. The fact that we now have children and youth with special needs back under the umbrella of the Children and Family Development Ministry means that we will have a great opportunity to be able to look at outcomes not just for children in care, not just for those who are on the child and youth special needs track but to be able to look at each child individually as they present along that continuum. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: I know that I could probably ask more questions about the IQ 70, but I think that this is actually a good stepping-off point in talking about performance measures and the continuum of services to ask some questions, then, about the Hughes recommendations and the implementation. I was actually very pleased to hear the minister refer to the Hughes recommendations in question period the other day. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
At last count there were some 15 recommendations that were still not complete. Could the minister give me an update on where we stand right now with implementing those remaining recommendations from the Ted Hughes report? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: There are no recommendations of the Hughes report that are not completed. There are those that by their very nature are ongoing. They will continue to be ongoing, as they were intended to be, but there are none of Ted Hughes's recommendations that have not been implemented. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Without getting into listing each of those items, I will certainly take the minister's word at face value that those 15 that were outstanding have now been met substantially. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I'd like to ask a little bit, then, about the recommendations that come from the children and families representative, because they obviously fit as a companion piece to the Hughes recommendations. There are dozens of these that are still, I think, in progress. There are timelines on many of these. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Does the minister…? Is she able to give me a bit of a status report on the variety of recommendations that the children and youth representative has made? I know that many of them have timelines attached to them as well. I'd be interested to hear. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
[1140]
Hon. M. Polak: First, I want to say that I would distinguish between the Hughes report and the reports that the representative produces. I wouldn't say that they are companion pieces. They have a very specific purpose, and they relate to specific cases and specific reviews on given topics that the representative has provided. They certainly are not standing along the same plane, if you will, or taking on the same nature as the Hughes recommendations, which were overall related to the activities of the ministry with respect to child protection in a very broad and forward-looking manner. The representative's reports are very focused and are directed at specific cases and at specific topic areas that she's chosen to review. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Other than the two most recent reports, the ministry has responded in some detail with respect to all of the other reports. We do not always align with the time frames that are in place in the reports, and that's very often just a result of the nature of the work involved. Again, very often, as with many of the Hughes recommendations, many are ongoing. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
We are in frequent, ongoing communication with the representative's office to ensure that they're aware of progress with respect to recommendations in reports or with respect to alternative actions that we've chosen to take in some cases. That is precisely why the recommendations flow from reports. They are recommendations. Through dialogue with their office, we then seek to be able to determine plans to put in place to ensure that we are responding appropriately. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
M. Karagianis: Certainly, I know that there are a vast number of issues that come out of these reports. I was only really going to focus on those that were specific to some of the ongoing processes that the ministry has talked about as part of this budget. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
I know that the Children and Youth Representative was particularly interested in the training activities aligning with the quality assurance program that has been implemented. We talked about that a little bit yesterday. There was some concern here, specifically coming out of a couple of the reports, around the training for staff and supervisors around this quality assurance program. Can the minister give me any update on how that training has proceeded? [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Hon. M. Polak: Perhaps this is an appropriate juncture at which to say, with regard to discussing training activities around quality assurance that the member is raising, it would be helpful to know which report that is coming from. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Noting the hour, I would move that the committee rise, report progress and seek leave to sit again. [DRAFT TRANSCRIPT ONLY]
Motion approved.
The committee rose at 11:45 a.m.
[ Return to: Legislative Assembly Home Page ]
Hansard Services
publishes transcripts both in print and on the Internet.
Chamber debates are broadcast on television and webcast on the Internet.
Question Period podcasts are available on the Internet.
TV channel guide • Broadcast schedule
Copyright (c) 2009: British Columbia Hansard Services, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada