2024 Progress Report – 2023-2025 Accessibility Plan
View as: ISSN 2817-965X Également publié en français sous le titre : Rapport d’étape 2024 – Plan sur l’accessibilité 2023-2025 This document is available on the Canadian Intergovernmental Conference Secretariat’s website, and in alternative formats upon request. For more information, contact: Canadian Intergovernmental Conference SecretariatP.O. Box 488, Station ‘A’Ottawa, OntarioK1N 8V5E-mail: info@scics.gc.ca Table of Contents General Contact Information & Feedback Process Areas in Section 5 of the Accessible Canada Act (ACA) Employment The Built Environment Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) Communication, other than ICT The Procurement of Goods, Services and Facilities The Design and Delivery of Programs and Services Transportation Consultations Feedback Glossary 1. General The full version of the Canadian Intergovernmental Conference Secretariat’s (CICS) Accessibility Plan is available here: www.scics.ca/en/accessibility. An easy read version, that is shorter and simpler than the plan, can also be found at the same location. The Accessibility Plan documents and Progress Reports have been written in accessible plain language, to be as clear, concise, and appropriate as possible for the intended audience. 1.1 Contact Information & Feedback Process CICS welcomes feedback from our employees, clients, conference attendees, and members of the public. We welcome feedback about accessibility at CICS and about our accessibility plan. Feedback can be submitted anonymously. We are committed to reviewing the feedback we receive and taking steps to address barriers that are identified through this feedback. You can submit feedback about accessibility at CICS, CICS’ implementation of its accessibility plan, or barriers you have encountered when dealing with CICS, by contacting: Benoit Massé, A/ Assistant Secretary E-mail: info@scics.ca Telephone: 613-995-2341 Mail: P.O. Box 488, Station ‘A’, Ottawa, Ontario, K1N 8V5 Electronic versions of CICS’ accessibility plan, progress reports, and a description of our feedback process that are compatible with assistive technology can be downloaded from our website at: www.scics.ca/en/accessibility. These can also be provided in alternative formats, within the following timelines: Print – 15 days Large print (Increased font size) – 15 days Braille (a system of raised dots that people who are blind or who have low vision can read with their fingers) – 45 days Audio (a recording of someone reading the text out loud) – 45 days 2. Areas in Section 5 of the Accessible Canada Act (ACA) Accessibility needs to be a part of everything we do. We need to prioritize accessibility early and often to be truly accessible. Some people and teams at CICS will have a greater role to play. However, we all have responsibilities in making CICS more accessible. This needs to be an organization-wide mission. 2.1 Employment CICS is a small agency, with only 40 employees. This means that our employees have many duties, and we count on our staff to do their jobs well. Our workplace needs to be accessible for them to do this. We want our staff to know they can be accommodated if they face barriers at work. CICS dedicated resources to improve the accommodation processes within the organization. To ensure the clarity of the accommodation process […]
by Aaron Lampole
Read more »
Increasing the Use of Restorative Justice in Criminal Matters in Canada: Findings from a 2019-2020 Jurisdictional Scan
Federal-Provincial-Territorial Working Group on Restorative Justice Winter 2024 Acknowledgements: The Working Group thanks all of the ministries and jurisdictions that provided data, as well as members of the FPT Working Group on Restorative Justice Sub-Committee: Data Collection and Evaluation for their help and advice. Table of Contents Executive Summary Highlights Recommendations Increasing the Use of Restorative Justice in Criminal Matters in Canada: Year Two of Reporting Introduction Background Methodology Cautions and Limitations Results Key Findings Comparing Baseline to Year 2 Data Participant Demographics Referred RJ Cases: Descriptive Information Accepted RJ Cases: Descriptive Information Restorative Justice Cases: Direct Victim Participation Reaching the Target: Jurisdictional Data for 2017/2018 to 2019/2020 Plans to Increase the Use of RJ Processes Recommendations Conclusion Appendix A: Participation in the Jurisdictional Scan: Ministries and Departments that Returned Data Appendix B: Definitions Used in the Survey Appendix C: Data Submission 2018/2019 and 2019/2020 Comparison Appendix D: Available Data Executive Summary The Federal Provincial-Territorial (FPT) Restorative Justice (RJ) Working Group (WG) Sub-Committee on Data and Research conducts annual jurisdictional scans on the use of RJ processes in the Canadian criminal justice sector. The goal of the scan is to track progress towards a 5% increase in RJ referrals from the 2017/2018 fiscal year to 2022-23.1 This report summarizes the results from the 2019/2020 fiscal year, two years after the baseline was collected in 2017/2018.2, 3 Survey respondents included 26 FPT ministries and departments who are members of the WG across 14 jurisdictions (see Appendix A for a list of jurisdictions). FPT ministries and departments were asked to provide data on the RJ programs or services they funded or provided, and information about concrete actions taken to increase RJ referrals. Every participating jurisdiction provided data, and 11 jurisdictions provided information about approaches to increase RJ referrals. The results of the survey indicated some progress towards the target of increasing the number of RJ referrals, accepted cases and participants. Despite that the majority of jurisdictions reported increases in referrals and accepted cases, the minority of jurisdictions that reported decreases dropped the national total of referrals and accepted cases below the baseline due to their large caseloads. In spite of the national total showing decreases compared to the baseline, the results show that the majority of jurisdictions reported increases in their referrals and accepted cases (Table 6). Jurisdictions have taken concrete action to increase RJ services and improve their data reporting, while the Data and Research Subcommittee of the WG (WGSC) has continued to refine the survey to capture a more robust picture of RJ services across the country. The findings show that majority has surpassed the 5% target for number of RJ referrals. Highlights Changes in data collection and reporting between years limit the ability to interpret overall changes from baseline (2017/2018) to year 1 (2018/2019) and year 2 (2019/2020)4, although reporting has stabilized between year 1 and year 2, with almost all ministries involved in RJ being able to report some data both years. The 26 participating ministries supported 339 […]
by Aaron Lampole
Read more »
Increasing the Use of Restorative Justice in Criminal Matters in Canada: Findings from a 2018-2019 Jurisdictional Scan
Federal-Provincial-Territorial Working Group on Restorative Justice Fall 2021 Acknowledgements: The Working Group thanks all of the ministries and jurisdictions that provided data, as well as members of the FPT Working Group on Restorative Justice Sub-Committee: Data Collection and Evaluation for their help and advice. Table of Contents Executive Summary Highlights Recommendations Increasing the Use of Restorative Justice in Criminal Matters in Canada: One Year of Progress Introduction Background Figure 1: A Continuum of Restorative Responses throughout the Justice System Table 1: Revisions to the 2017-18 Baseline Report Methodology Cautions and Limitations Results Key Findings Comparing Baseline to Year 1 Data Table 2: Percent Change on Select Variables between the 2017-18 Baseline and 2018-19 Year 1 Data Figure 2: Youth Accused of Police-Reported Crime, by Clearance Status, Canada, 2009 to 2019 Table 3: Age of Offender: Referred and Accepted Cases Table 4: Offence Category for Referred and Accepted Cases Referred RJ Cases: Descriptive Information Table 5: Referral by Criminal Justice Stage and Jurisdiction Table 6: Source of Referral for the 2017-18 Baseline and 2018-19 Year 1 Data Table 7: Police Referrals by Jurisdiction Accepted RJ Cases: Descriptive Information Restorative Justice Cases: Direct Victim Participation Table 8: Offence Category by Direct Victim Participation Table 9: Demographics of Offender by Direct Victim Reaching the Target: Jurisdictional Data for 2017-18 and 2018-19 Table 10: Partial, Preliminary Jurisdictional Data for the 2017-18 Baseline and 2018-19 Year 1 Data Plans to Increase the Use of RJ Processes Table 11: Jurisdictional Plans to Increase Referrals and Accepted Cases Progress Challenges and Lessons Learned Discussion Data Collection Practices Defining and Measuring RJ Practices Victim Involvement in RJ Processes Recommendations Conclusion Appendix A: Participation in the Jurisdictional Scan – Ministries that Returned Data Appendix B: Definitions Used in the Survey Appendix C: Participation in the Jurisdictional Scan – Responses Received from WG Members Appendix D: Data Submission 2017-18 and 2018-19 Comparison Appendix E: Available Data Appendix F: Research Initiatives, by Jurisdiction Appendix G: Concrete Steps Made towards Achieving Target, by Jurisdiction Appendix H: Best Practices and Lessons Learned as Jurisdictions Implement their Strategies Executive Summary The Federal Provincial-Territorial (FPT) Working Group (WG) on Restorative Justice Sub-Committee: Data Collection and Evaluation (WG) conducts jurisdictional scans on the use of Restorative Justice (RJ) processes in the Canadian criminal justice sector. The goal of the scan is to track progress towards a 5.0% increase in RJ processes from the 2017-18 fiscal year to 2022-23.1 This report summarizes the results from the 2018-19 fiscal year, one year after the baseline was collected in 2017-18.2, 3 Survey respondents included 24 FPT ministries and departments who are members of the WG across 14 jurisdictions (see Appendix A for a list of jurisdictions). FPT ministries and departments were asked to provide data on the RJ programs or services they funded or provided, and information about concrete actions taken to increase RJ referrals. Every participating jurisdiction provided data, and 11 jurisdictions provided information about concrete actions taken. The results of the survey indicated significant progress towards the […]
by Aaron Lampole
Read more »