prince edward-lennox and addington social services

Agenda

Prince Edward-Lennox and Addington

Social Services Committee

Meeting to be held - Thursday, November 9, 2017

Boardroom, Napanee Social Services Office

10:00 AM

Call to Order

Adoption of Minutes

Meeting - Thursday, September 7, 2017

Page 3 - 5

Approval of Agenda

Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest and General Nature Thereof

Presentations

Social Assistance Modernization

Marlynne Ferguson, Director, Social Services will provide a presentation on Social Assistance Modernization.

Matters for Consideration

1. Smoke Free Policy

October 24, 2017 staff report re: Smoke Free Policy (Manager, Social Housing)

Staff Recommendation Included

Page 6 - 9

2. Housing

October 24, 2017 staff report re: Transitional and Emergency Housing (Manager, Social Housing)

Staff Recommendation Included

0 - 11

3. Special Priority

October 24, 2017 staff report re: Special Priority Policy Update (Manager, Social Housing)

Page 12 - 15

Prince Edward-Lennox and Addington Social Services Committee

Meeting to be held - November 9, 2017

4. Ontario Works Caseload

October 26, 2017 staff report re: Ontario Works Caseload & Employment Outcomes (Manager, Social Assistance)

Page 16 - 19

5. Ontario Early Years Child and Family Centre

October 25, 2017 staff report re: Ontario Early Years Child and Family Centre Initial Plan (Supervisor, Children's Services)

0 - 58

6. Regulatory Amendments

October 25, 2017 staff report re: Regulatory Registry Posting, Proposed Regulatory Amendments under the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014 (Supervisor, Children's Services)

Page 59 - 62

Other Business

The next Prince Edward - Lennox and Addington Social Services Committee Meeting will be determined at a later date.

Adjournment

Page 2 of 62

Prince Edward - Lennox and Addington

Social Services Committee

Meeting held - Thursday, September 7, 2017

Council Chambers

Shire Hall, Picton

10:00 AM

Present:

Prince Edward County

Councillor Lenny Epstein

Councillor Gordon Fox

Lennox and Addington County

Warden Bill Lowry

Councillor Marg Isbester

Staff Present: Brenda Orchard, Chief Administrative Officer, L&A

James Hepburn, Chief Administrative Officer, PEC

Marlynne Ferguson, Director, Social Services

Pam Kent, Supervisor, Children's Services

Joanne Munro-Cape, Supervisor, Ontario Works, Picton

Kent Taugher, Business Analyst, Social Housing

Karen Frigault, Administrative Assistant

Regrets: Mayor Robert Quaiff

Councillor John Wise

Call to Order

Councillor Epstein called the meeting to order at 10:02 A.M.

Adoption of Minutes

Moved by Warden Lowry Seconded by Councillor Isbester

That the minutes of the Prince Edward - Lennox and Addington Social Services meeting held Thursday, July 13, 2017 be adopted.

SSC-17-49

CARRIED

Approval of Agenda

Moved by Councillor Fox Seconded by Councillor Isbester

That the agenda be approved.

SSC-17-50

CARRIED

of 62


Meeting held - September 7, 2017

Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest and General Nature Thereof

No disclosure of pecuniary interest and the general nature thereof was declared.

Matters for Consideration

Working Group

Moved by Councillor Isbester Seconded by Councillor Fox

That the August 22, 2017 staff report re: Provincial Accommodation Working Group (Supervisor, Children's Services) be noted and received;

and further,

That Prince Edward - Lennox and Addington Social Services Committee write a letter to local School Boards asking for waiver of all accommodation fees for early learning and child care programs to support the Renewed Early Years and Child Care Policy Framework, Schools First Approach and Community Hub Development;

and further,

That Prince Edward - Lennox and Addington Social Services Committee request via the Provincial Accommodation Working Group that the Ministry of Education use their authority under the Education Act to regulate accommodation fees charged by school boards for third-party operators by including the occupancy cost for early learning and child care programs located in schools within the school funding formula;

and further,

That this item be brought forward to both the County of Prince Edward and the County of Lennox and Addington Councils for information and support.

SSC-17-51

CARRIED

Matters for Information

Moved by Councillor Isbester Seconded by Warden Lowry

That the following items for information be noted and received:

SSC-17-52

CARRIED

Housing Forum

August 18, 2017 staff report re: Housing Forum Save the Date (Manager, Social Housing)

Page 2 of 3

of 62


Meeting held - September 7, 2017

Social Housing Update

August 30, 2017 staff report re: Social Housing Update (Manager, Social Housing)

Ontario Works Caseload

August 23, 2017 staff report re: Ontario Works Caseload & Employment Outcomes (Manager, Social Assistance)

Other Business The next regularly scheduled Prince Edward - Lennox and Addington Social Services Committee meeting will be held on Thursday, November 9, 2017 in Napanee.

Adjournment

Moved by Warden Lowry Seconded by Councillor Fox

That this meeting of Prince Edward - Lennox and Addington Social Services Committee be adjourned at 10:50 a.m.

SSC-17-53

CARRIED

Councillor Lenny Epstein - Chairperson Marlynne Ferguson - Director, Social Services

Page 3 of 3

of 62

Staff Report to Prince Edward-Lennox and Addington Social Services

Prepared by:

Annette Keogh, Manager, Social Housing

Subject:

Smoke Free Policy

Date:

October 24, 2017

Recommendation:

That the Prince Edward-Lennox and Addington Social Services (PELASS) Committee approve the implementation of a smoke free policy for all Prince Edward-Lennox and Addington (PELA) social housing units effective May 1, 2018. Preamble:

On June 8, 2017 PELASS Committee was presented with a recommendation to approve the implementation of a smoke free policy in all PELA social housing units. Costs associated with damages caused by tenants smoking in their units were illustrated as well as the known health issues related to smoking. PELASS Committee noted concerns with the role smoking has for those with mental health and addiction issues. Staff were directed to draft a smoke free policy for PELASS Committee to review before implementation. Accordingly, a draft version of the smoke free policy is attached. Information/Discussion/Analysis:

The implementation of the smoke free policy was originally planned for January 1, 2018. After consideration, the decision was made to change the implementation date to May 1, 2018 as staff will be better prepared and can use the early months of 2018 to educate the tenants and prepare them for the implementation of the policy. Weather conditions will also be more suitable for those who might be smoking outdoors. The smoke free policy was drafted by a working group composed of PELASS employees. The smoke free policy requires tenants to comply with a nine metre smoke-free buffer zone around all balconies and patios, enclosed common areas, doorways and windows to all PELA Social Housing owned single, duplex or townhouse dwellings and any apartment building. Tenants have been notified that a smoke free policy is being considered by PELASS. The smoke free concept has been discussed at all tenant meetings in the buildings in both counties in 2016 and 2017. Generally current tenants are overwhelmingly in support of a smoke free policy. Many tenants,

of 62

including smokers, are concerned about the smell of smoke in the hallways and in the entrances and feel a smoke free policy will address this. Tenants will be notified well in advance that the smoke free policy is officially being implemented. Communication will be implemented in all PELA social housing units through the use of community boards, television monitors and notices. Additional signage will be posted at all entrances, exits, washrooms, common rooms, and other appropriate locations indicating no smoking. The use of social media and both County’s websites will also be used as a form of communication. Tenants with questions or issues will be directed to contact housing staff that have been familiarized with the smoke free policy and have been trained to answer any questions tenants may have regarding the policy. Staff from Property Services and Housing will receive training on multiple areas involved with the implementation and enforcement of the smoke free policy to ensure initial and continued success of the policy. The training will focus on how to address smoking infractions, how to deal with difficult tenant conversations around smoking on PELA social housing properties, the information required for new tenants, tenants that are transferring, and those applying to the housing waitlist. Community partners, such as mental health and addiction agencies, Health Units, Community Health Centres and so on, will be invited to participate in the implementation of the Smoke Free policy by offering supports, crisis line intervention, mental health appointments, etc. The Kingston Frontenac Lennox and Addington Health Unit has indicated a willingness to host smoking cessation support programs for tenants and provide any information or supplies needed to assist tenants. Available supports will be broadly communicated to tenants. Tenants will be provided with the crisis support line number and pamphlets outlining the supports around addictions and mental health available locally. Financial Impact:

There is no financial impact. Attachments:

Draft Smoke Free Policy Approvals:

Marlynne Ferguson Approved – November 1, 2017 Brenda Orchard Approved – November 2, 2017

of 62

Prince Edward – Lennox & Addington (PELA) Social Housing

Policy name Smoke-Free (Draft)

Policy number -2017

Date October 2017

Date reviewed or revised

References Residential Tenancies Act, 2006(RTA), Smoke-Free Act, 2006

Purpose: This policy provides guidelines outlining the rules around smoking in any residence owned and operated by Prince Edward-Lennox & Addington Housing Corporation. A Smoke-Free policy achieves several benefits: • Improved air quality and reduced exposure to second hand smoke • Decreased unit turnover costs for non-smoking units • Decreased fire risk

Scope: This policy applies to all tenants, occupants, guests, employees, contactors, business invitees and support service providers living at, working at or visiting all units directly owned and operated by Prince Edward-Lennox & Addington Housing Corporation. The Smoke-Free Policy will be adopted through attrition, which means that existing tenants will be exempted from this policy for the length of their tenancy. Rental units that are vacated on May 1, 2018 or after will then be designated a smoke-free unit.

Definitions: Smoking: shall include inhaling, exhaling of any tobacco or marijuana (including medical marijuana), and similar products whose use generates smoke or vapour, including the use of e-cigarettes.

Policy: • All new tenants must abide by the Smoke-Free Policy that pertains to the nine (9) metre smoke-free

buffer zone around all balconies and patios, enclosed common areas, doorways and windows to all PELA Social Housing owned single, duplex or townhouse dwellings and any (multi-residential) apartment building.

• No tenant, resident, guest, business invitee, or visitor shall smoke cigarettes, cigars or any similar product whose use generates smoke within the building, except for those used for spiritual traditions e.g., smudge ceremonies.

• All Tenancy Agreements effective on May 1, 2018 or later will include a smoke-free clause that prohibits smoking in the leased rental unit which includes the balcony/patio*, if applicable.

• Current tenants that complete an internal transfer within PELA Social Housing effective on or after May 1, 2018 will be required to sign a new Tenancy Agreement that contains a smoke-free clause.

• Tenants who have signed a Tenancy Agreement that is effective on or prior to April 31, 2018, who remain in the same unit and add an adult household member to the Tenancy Agreement on or after

of 62

April 30, 2018 will not be required to sign a new Tenancy Agreement that contains the smoke-free clause.

• PELA Social Housing does not guarantee a smoke-free environment. The adoption of a smoke-free policy does not make PELA Social Housing the guarantor of tenant’s health or of a smoke-free unit, building or complex. PELA Social Housing will rely on the adaptation and cooperation of its tenants to become a smoke-free environment. However, PELA Social Housing will take reasonable steps to enforce the smoke-free terms of its Tenancy Agreements.

• Smoking cessation program referrals, supports and resources will be available to all tenants.

• Current tenants wishing to make their units smoke-free will be supported in this request.

Procedure: 1. Housing Services will ensure that tenants are provided with a copy of the policy and local supports. 2. Staff will respond to any questions or issues from tenants related to the policy. 3. Violations of the Smoke-Free policy must be reported in writing to PELA Social Housing for follow up. *All rental units may not include a patio or balcony area.

of 62


Prepared by:


Subject:

Transitional and Emergency Housing

Date:

October 24, 2017

Recommendation:

That the Prince Edward-Lennox and Addington Social Services (PELASS) Committee approve the allocation of two units in each County to be used as a pilot for six months for transitional and emergency housing, with supports, within social housing stock from any of Prince Edward-Lennox and Addington Social Services portfolio; and further, That a report be provided to the PELASS Committee at the end of the six month period to determine program continuation. Preamble:

In May 2017 in consultation with community partners a proposal was submitted to the Ministry of Housing for a project under the Home for Good funding stream. Although the Home for Good proposal was not approved for funding, staff are currently reviewing the proposed activities to determine facets that could proceed within the current staffing complement and housing stock as pilot projects. Information/Discussion/Analysis:

Except for temporary housing specifically for victims of domestic violence, there is no transitional housing in the two counties. Victims of sporadic or chronic homelessness are supported temporarily with brief stays in local motels or provided with transportation to shelters in neighboring municipalities such as Kingston and Peterborough. Total numbers (74 motel stays in 2016) do not support a ‘shelter’ with capital investment but do reflect a need that currently is not being met satisfactorily. It is proposed that two social housing units in each County be made available for transitional and emergency housing. For the six-month pilot period these units would be allocated from the PELASS housing stock portfolio. If the pilot is successful, units could be allocated from rent supplement, non-profit housing or community partner units as well. As one unit is allocated to a homeless household

of 62

based on criteria developed specifically for the program, another unit will be made available for transitional housing for the next homeless household, up to a maximum of two transitional units in each county at any given point in time. Community Homelessness Prevention Initiative (CHPI) funds will support the provision of furnishings and other household start-up costs. Social housing program funds will support units once they become permanently housed for the duration of the pilot. If, following the pilot, it is determined that this approach to emergency and transitional housing is effective, rent supplement units could be funded through the Investment in Affordable Housing funding and community partner housing could be funded through the community agency budget. The transitional units will be available for all eligible households. Following the allocation to a transitional unit, the household will be assessed and follow-up support will be coordinated as appropriate. Agreements with mental health and addiction agencies as well as other supporting agencies will be negotiated for the pilot to ensure that these units are a priority for receiving enhanced support to stabilize the family unit. The legislative requirement for service level standards for PELASS is 497 Rent Geared to Income (RGI) units. Currently the social housing units (414) and the rent supplement units (115) exceed these service level standards. This makes it possible to hold two units in each County for the use of transitional or emergency housing. Financial Impact:

The financial impacts for the six month pilot period are minimal. There is likely to be a small variance in the tenant’s contribution to the rental income during the emergency or transitional phase-in period. PELASS has $20,000 in funds that can only be allocated for addictions and mental health support and it will be used for enhanced services throughout the pilot project.

Approvals:


of 62


Prepared by:


Subject:

Special Priority Policy Update

Date:

October 24, 2017

Recommendation:

That the Prince Edward Lennox and Addington Social Services Committee receive this report for information. Preamble:

In 2001, when social housing was transferred from the province to the municipalities the legislation ensured those experiencing domestic violence were given priority for a social housing unit through the Special Priority Policy (SPP). The SPP ensured that eligible applicants who experienced domestic violence were given priority access for rent-geared-to-income (RGI) social housing before all other applicants who are accommodated on a chronological basis. The SPP currently allows priority access if the applicant is residing with an abuser, has lived with the abuser in the previous three months or has been sponsored by them as an immigrant from whom they intend to separate permanently. Acceptable records of abusive behaviours (e.g. a record of police intervention) are set out in the regulation and the abuse must be verified in this way by professionals working with the victim. Acceptable professionals are also identified in the regulation. The request for special priority status must be made in writing by someone who is 16 years or older and must include written consent for the Service Manager to access information or documents of verification. Under the Long Term Affordable Housing Strategy Update (LTAHS) the Province committed to making policy enhancements to the SPP legislation. Information/Discussion/Analysis:

An SPP working group that included Service Managers, housing providers, violence against women sector organizations and Indigenous organizations was established to advise the province on ways in which the SPP could be enhanced to include survivors of human trafficking and better meet the housing needs of survivors of domestic violence.

of 62

The proposed amendments are intended to: 1) Expand the policy to include survivors of human trafficking; 2) Strengthen policy provisions to better recognize the culture and cycle of abuse; and 3) Improve the SPP application process, making it easier for households to apply for housing

under the policy. The amendments include:

• Expansion of the rules to include survivors of human trafficking;

• Allowance for applications to be placed on hold if reconciliation is being explored (only in situations of domestic abuse, not for human trafficking);

• Addition of a record of forcible confinement to the records of abuse;

• Addition of mid-wives and Indigenous elders to the verifiers of abuse;

• Requirement that household eligibility for the SPP and RGI be addressed prior to addressing rental arrears or amounts owing;

• Provision of flexibility for Service Managers to contact a safe alternative contact as identified by the SPP applicant;

• Simplification for SPP households to apply for the SPP and RGI even without certain information and documents;

• Revisions to the definition of spouse to recognize individuals who are legally married; and

• Revisions to the definition of abuse to clarify that for the purposes of the definition, children who are unrelated to their abuser have access to the SPP.

Currently, the human trafficking activity in the two counties is largely unknown although it is believed to be a growing concern by police and social services agencies. There are 480 applicants on the waitlist for housing in Prince Edward-Lennox and Addington. Thirty-five of the 480 (approximately 7%) are SPP applicants. There is at least one SPP applicant on the waitlist for each Prince Edward-Lennox and Addington social housing building. Seventeen of the SPP applicants are waiting for 2 or 3 bedroom units, thereby indicating the presence of children in the households. While the waitlist for PELASS has grown in numbers over the last five years from approximately 350 to 480, the number of SPP applicants per year has not grown significantly. Financial Impact:


Correspondence from Janet Hope, Assistant Deputy Minister, Ministry of Housing, July 14, 2017 Approvals:


of 62

I am pleased to provide you with an update on enhancements to the Special Priority Policy (SPP) being proposed under Ontario Regulation 367/11 of the Housing Services Act, 2011 (HSA) – an important component of Ontario’s updated Long-Term Affordable Housing Strategy (LTAHS Update). SPP provides survivors of domestic violence (who qualify for SPP, based on eligibility requirements set out in regulation) with priority access to rent-geared-to-income (RGI) social housing above all other chronological applicants. With growing awareness of domestic violence, human trafficking and gender-based violence, the government has made key commitments to better respond to and meet the needs of these individuals. One of these – articulated in the LTAHS Update – was a commitment to make policy enhancements to SPP (under Ontario Regulation 367/11 of the HSA). To inform this work, the Ministry of Housing established a technical SPP Working Group – comprised of Service Managers, housing providers, violence against women sector organizations and Indigenous organizations – to provide advice on ways in which the SPP could be enhanced to include survivors of human trafficking and better meet the housing needs of survivors of domestic violence. The changes being proposed are based on the advice provided by the SPP Working Group and are intended to: 1. Expand the policy to include survivors of human trafficking; 2. Strengthen policy provisions to better recognize the culture and cycle abuse; and, 3. Improve the SPP application process, making it easier for households to apply for

housing under the policy. More information on the details of enhancements to SPP may be found on the Regulatory Registry at the following address: http://www.ontariocanada.com/registry/view.do?postingId=24442&language=en The ministry will be accepting feedback on these proposed changes until September 1, 2017. I invite you to review our proposals and welcome your feedback.

…/2

Ministry of Housing Ministère du Logement

Assistant Deputy Minister’s Office Bureau du sous-ministre adjoint

Housing Division Division du Logement

777 Bay St 14th Flr 777, rue Bay 14e étage Toronto ON M5G 2E5 Toronto ON M5G 2E5 Telephone: (416) 585-6738 Téléphone: (416) 585-6738

Fax: (416) 585-6800 Télécopieur: (416) 585-6800

July 14, 2017

of 62

http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/AssetFactory.aspx?did=13683

http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/AssetFactory.aspx?did=13683

http://www.ontariocanada.com/registry/view.do?postingId=24442&language=en

-2- Sincerely, Original signed by Janet Hope Assistant Deputy Minister

of 62


Prepared by:

Walter Burt

Subject:

Ontario Works Caseload & Employment Outcomes

Date:

October 26, 2017

Recommendation:


The data included in the following report includes the Ontario Works caseload data and PELASS’s employment outcome measures data. The Ontario Works caseload data includes information covering the current year as well as the previous two years. The employment outcome information demonstrates the comparison of PELASS’s August 2017 performance compared with the negotiated service target and the Provincial average. Information/Discussion/Analysis:

Ontario Works Caseload There was no statistically measurable change in the caseload between August 2017 and September 2017. The total caseload continues to remain lower compared to September 2017 by 2.4% and the year to date average remains lower by 2.6%.

The Ontario Works caseload trends for September 2017 are:

Monthly Changes August 2017 September 2017 % Change

Prince Edward 262 258 -1.5

Lennox & Addington 671 679 1.2

PE-L&A Total 933 937 0.4

of 62

Comparison to Same Month Last Year September 2016 September 2017 % Change



PE-L&A Total 960 937 -2.4

Comparison of Year-to-Date (2016 to 2017) YTD Average 2016 YTD Average 2017 % Change



PE-L&A Total 967 942 -2.6

Caseload Data Sources: Social Assistance Management System (SAMS) "CRS880M-Subsidy Claim Expenditure Reports". Note: Some figures may not total as expected due to rounding.

Ontario Works Employment Outcomes The employment assistance funding envelope provided by the Ministry of Community and Social Services, MCSS, is tied to employment outcome performance over a two-year business cycle. The most recent business cycle commenced in January 2017. The outcome measures for 2017 are as follows:

• The percentage of the total monthly caseload with employment earnings • The average amount of the monthly employment earnings reported by recipients • The percentage of all Ontario Works files closed during the month for employment reasons.

For example, if a total of 80 files were closed during the month and 10 cases were closed for employment reasons, this measure would be 12.5%.

• The percentage of the total active Ontario Works caseload exiting social assistance during the month for employment reasons. For example, if the total Ontario Works caseload was 850 for the month and 10 cases were closed for employment reasons, this measure would be 1.17%

The following table includes the proposed targets with MCSS compared with PELASS’s achievement and the provincial average for the month of August 2017. As in past years, PLEASS achievement has exceeded the negotiated target during the summer months. This is largely due to the increased seasonal employment opportunities in the service, hospitality and construction sectors.

of 62

Aug-17 Aug-17

Employment Outcome Target PELASS Achievement

Provincial Average

Percentage of Caseload with Employment Earnings 18.96% 20.53% 13.12%

Average Monthly Employment Earnings per Case

$798 $854 $820

Percentage of Terminations Due to Employment

23.45% 24.66% 16.16%

Percentage of Cases Exiting to Employment 2.14% 2.19% 0.94%

Source: Social Assistance Operations Performance Report - Aug 2017 Financial Impact:


Caseload Data 2015-17 Approvals:

Marlynne Ferguson Approved – October 31, 2017 Brenda Orchard Approved – November 2, 2017

of 62

PE L&A PELA PE L&A PELAMain Office(TBD)

PE L&A PELAMain Office(TBD)

PE L&A PELAMain Office(TBD)

Mnth Diff.

% Mnth Diff

Annual Diff.

% Annual

Diff

Annual Diff. YTD

% Annual

Diff YTD2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

January 345 605 950 305 692 997 2 314 656 970 12 296 647 943 0 31 3.4% -27 -2.8% -27 -2.8%February 338 611 949 328 701 1029 2 300 656 956 12 297 652 949 0 6 0.6% -80 -7.8% -67 -6.6%

March 330 612 942 346 687 1033 0 302 662 964 12 284 664 948 4 -1 -0.1% -85 -8.2% -73 -7.2%April 334 632 966 366 657 1023 2 313 641 954 6 279 662 941 1 -7 -0.7% -82 -8.0% -75 -7.4%May 335 631 966 358 651 1009 2 298 668 966 28 283 669 952 0 11 1.2% -57 -5.6% -72 -7.0%June 327 621 948 344 631 975 8 307 667 974 13 264 673 937 0 -15 -1.6% -38 -3.9% -66 -6.5%July 328 615 943 317 637 954 14 298 661 959 0 264 672 936 0 -1 -0.1% -18 -1.9% -59 -5.9%

August 333 622 955 330 656 986 3 313 687 1000 2 262 671 933 0 -3 -0.3% -53 -5.4% -58 -5.8%September 323 625 948 322 646 968 17 290 670 960 0 258 679 937 0 4 0.4% -31 -3.2% -55 -5.5%

October 319 613 932 307 626 933 10 274 649 923 0November 271 638 909 307 591 898 54 278 642 920 3December 284 678 962 313 641 954 6 284 628 912 1

Average: 322 625 948 329 651 980 10 298 657 955 7 276 665 942 1 3 0.3% -52 -5.2% -61 -6.1%Standard

Deviation: 22 19 16 21 31 41% by County 34.0% 66.0% 33.5% 66.5% 31.2% 68.8% 29.3% 70.7%

2003

973

969876

933 1020

957

* Effective December 21, 2016 SAMS & SDMT data includes 'OW Regular' and 'Temporary Care Assistance'. Data does not incldue 'Emergency Assistance'.

* Caseload data for November 2014 to February 2015 was derived from rerun reports generated in April, 2015. All other SAMS data for 2015 was derived from rerun reports generated in December 2015.

928

1002

949

934

2016

947

* SAMS Report 880 currently identifies an additional category: "Main Office" (TBD). As of August 2015, data validation is being sought from the province in order to determine if and where to code this data (i.e., to either Prince Edward or to

Lennox & Addington).

* Caseload Data for January 2016 to September 2016 was derived from the most recent rerun reports generated as of October, 2016.

* Caseload Data Sources: data prior to October 2014 was derived from the Service Delivery Model Technology (SDMT) "Benefit Unit Summary Report"; and, data from November 2014 to the present has been derived from the Social Assistance

Management System (SAMS) "CRS880M-Subsidy Claim Expenditure Reports".

Prince Edward - Lennox & Addington Social ServicesOntario Works Caseload 2015-2017*

Quarterly Average2017 2016-17

915

964

2014 2015

963

965

973

918

960

926

918

880

900

920

940

960

980

1000

1020

1040

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Cas

eloa

d

Prince Edward - Lennox & Addington Social ServicesOntario Works Caseload 2015-2017 (by Year)

2015

2016

2017

Printed On: 10/26/2017

Prepared By: W. Burt

of 62


Prepared by:

Pam Kent, Supervisor Children’s Services

Subject:

Ontario Early Years Child and Family Centre Initial Plan

Date:

October 25, 2017

Recommendation:


The Ministry of Education announced in February 2016 a provincial plan to integrate and transform all Ministry of Education funded child and family programs into a system of service and supports for children aged 0-6 and their families. As of January 2018, municipalities are required to manage the delivery of the core OEYCFC services related to:

• Engaging parents and caregivers; • Supporting early learning and development; and, • Making connections to other family services.

Information/Discussion/Analysis:

Consolidated municipal service managers (CMSMs) may choose to directly deliver services or continue to deliver services through contracts with community organizations. To prepare for this transformation, CMSMs were required to conduct local needs assessments. Engagement of key early years partners including; school boards, child and family program agencies, parents, caregivers, community partners and other community stakeholders, was undertaken to inform the planning and delivery of OEYCFC programs and services. CMSMs were requested to submit their Council approved initial plans for Ontario Early Years Child and Family Centres to the Ministry of Education by September 29, 2017. PELASS’s Initial Plan for Ontario Early Years Child and Family Centre was approved at the September 27th meeting of Lennox and Addington Council to meet the submission deadline to the Ministry of Education. The initial plan included a summary of the needs assessment, and described how programs and services will be delivered beginning January 2018. The Ministry of Education acknowledged that 2018 will be a transition year and that CMSMs are expected to plan for change management within the system over the course of 2018.

of 62

PELASS secured the services of a consulting firm to support the needs assessment data collection and the community engagement process. The detailed Initial Plan for PELASS, including recommendations and a change management plan, is attached. The plan includes an executive summary to provide a succinct overview of the key elements of the initial plan for the counties of Prince Edward and Lennox and Addington. Financial Impact:

This report has no financial impact. Attachments:

Initial Plan, Ontario Early Years Child and Family Centres Approvals:


of 62

Prince Edward – Lennox and Addington Social Services (PELASS) Children Services

INITIAL PLAN: ONTARIO EARLY YEARS CHILD

AND FAMILY CENTRES

of 62

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................... 1

BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................................................... 1

ENGAGEMENT PROCESS ................................................................................................................................................... 1

LOCAL NEEDS ASSESSMENT .............................................................................................................................................. 2

SERVICE TRANSITION RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................................................................... 3

CHANGE MANAGEMENT PLAN .......................................................................................................................................... 5

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 6

PURPOSE ...................................................................................................................................................................... 6

BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................................................... 6

SETTING THE STAGE ........................................................................................................................................................ 7

CURRENT SITUATION IN PRINCE EDWARD AND LENNOX AND ADDINGTON ................................................................................. 7

SERVICE INVENTORY...................................................................................................................................................... 11

CHAPTER 2: LOCAL NEEDS ASSESSMENT .............................................................................................................. 14

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................ 14

METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................................................................... 14

Parents and Caregivers ....................................................................................................................................... 14

Community Partners ........................................................................................................................................... 15

OUTREACH AND COMMUNICATION .................................................................................................................................. 16

ANALYSIS .................................................................................................................................................................... 16

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ................................................................................................................................................ 22

SUGGESTED CONSIDERATIONS ........................................................................................................................................ 22

CHAPTER 3: SERVICE TRANSITION RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................................................... 24

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................ 24

RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................................................................................... 24

CHAPTER 4: CHANGE MANAGEMENT PLAN ......................................................................................................... 26

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................ 26

SERVICE TRANSITION ..................................................................................................................................................... 26

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT ...................................................................................................................................... 26

COMMUNICATIONS FOR CHANGE MANAGEMENT ............................................................................................................... 26

COMMUNITY PLANNING ................................................................................................................................................ 27

of 62

ii

List of Tables

TABLE 1: NUMBER OF CHILDREN 0-4 YEARS IN PRINCE EDWARD AND LENNOX AND ADDINGTON (2016 CENSUS) ................................ 8

TABLE 2: NUMBER OF CHILDREN 5-12 YEARS IN PRINCE EDWARD AND LENNOX AND ADDINGTON (2016 CENSUS) .............................. 9

TABLE 3: PERCENTAGE OF INDIGENOUS AND FRANCOPHONE PERSONS IN PRINCE EDWARD AND LENNOX AND ADDINGTON .................. 10

TABLE 4: SUMMARY OF ENGAGEMENT METHODS ................................................................................................................. A-1

List of Figures

FIGURE 1: LENNOX AND ADDINGTON GEOGRAPHIC AREA ....................................................................................................... A-2

FIGURE 2: PRINCE EDWARD COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC AREA ....................................................................................................... A-3

FIGURE 3: % OF CHILDREN VULNERABLE IN ONE OR MORE DOMAIN.…………………………………………………………………………….……........9

FIGURE 4: % FRENCH AS MOTHER TONGUE IN PRINCE EDWARD AND LENNOX AND ADDINGTON……………………………………….……..…A-4

FIGURE 5: % OF INDIGENOUS SELF-IDENTIFICATION IN PRINCE EDWARD AND LENNOX AND ADDINGTON……………………………………... A-5

FIGURE 6: MAP OF EARLY YEARS PROGRAMS IN PELA FOR CHILDREN 0-4 YEARS ......................................................................... 12

FIGURE 7: MAP OF EARLY YEARS PROGRAMS IN PELA FOR CHILDREN 5-12 YEARS ....................................................................... 13

Figure 8: Map of Survey OEYCFC Respondents…………………………………………………………………………………………………..…A-6

of 62

1

Executive Summary

Background The province of Ontario has made a commitment to modernize child care and early years programming. As

part of this commitment the Ministry of Education announced its intention to transform Ministry funded

child and family programs into an increasingly integrated cohesive system of services and supports for

children 0-6 years and their parents and caregivers, known as OEYCFCs. The County of Lennox and

Addington, as Consolidated Municipal Services Manager (CMSM), is responsible for managing the new

OEYCFCs in Prince Edward County and the County of Lennox and Addington. The purpose of this document

is to outline the transition plan that the CMSM will undertake to implement new OEYCFCs beginning in

2018.

The Ministry of Education (MEDU) currently funds early years programs in Prince Edward County and the

County of Lennox and Addington through:

Ontario Early Years Centres, and

Child Care Resource Centres

To prepare for the transformation, the Children’s Services Division of Prince Edward-Lennox and Addington

Social Services (PELASS) conducted a comprehensive community consultation including a local needs

assessment with key community partners, parents and caregivers.

Engagement Process Multiple methods to target a wide range of stakeholders across the Counties of Prince Edward and Lennox

and Addington were used in the local needs assessment. A summary of the engagement methods, dates

and locations consulted is presented below.

Key Stakeholder Engagement Method

Parents and Caregivers Indigenous Online Survey (n=231) Francophone Pop Up Consultations (n=62) Families in Rural Communities Indigenous Sharing Circle (n=4)

Early Years Program Staff Front-line staff Community Conversations (n=10) Supervisors and Directors Interviews (n=4)

Community Partners Community Service Agencies Online Survey (n=28) Licensed Childcare Providers Community Conversations (n=11) Kindergarten Staff Interviews (n=3) School Board Early Years Leads

of 62

2

Local Needs Assessment This section describes the data collected from research and community consultation activities to

understand the landscape of existing services, demographic profiles of families, the needs and preferences

of families, and the strengths and challenges of existing programs.

In Prince Edward County, there are 890 children aged 0-4 years and in Lennox and Addington, there are

1,990 children aged 0-4 years (2016 Census).

Programming, funded by MEDU, is currently being provided by the following agencies:

• Lennox and Addington Resources for Children (LARC)

• The HUB Child and Family Centre (The HUB)

The following provides a high level “snap shot” of findings from the local needs assessment.

Preferred Types of Services

Parents and caregivers prefer programs that are “drop-in” compared to registered, structured programs.

Longer “drop-in” hours would help to accommodate working schedules.

Preferred Program Days and Times

Parents and caregivers prefer programs that are on weekdays (Monday to Friday). This was followed by a

preference for programs on Saturday. Parents and caregivers prefer programs that are in the morning

(8am-12pm). This includes the mornings of both weekdays and weekends. For participants at the

Indigenous Sharing Circle, participants would prefer weekday programs in the morning and weekend

programs in the afternoons.

Preferred Program Locations

Parents and caregivers prefer programs in the following locations:

1. Schools

2. Ontario Early Years Centres

3. Libraries

4. Community Recreation Centres

Benefits of Early Years Programs

For parents and caregivers, the biggest benefits of the early years programs were that their child enjoyed

the program, that they felt welcomed, and that they met parents with children around the same age.

Online survey respondents also provided many comments about preparing children for school, inter-

disciplinary education from public health, and the friendliness of staff. For participants at the Indigenous

Sharing Circle, the parenting programs and workshops were appreciated for being child friendly,

having hands on activities and being accessible because they are offered at no cost to participants.

Early years staff and community partners described the greatest benefits of the existing early years

programs as providing quality programming, being responsive to family needs, establishing trusting

of 62

3

relationships, and providing system navigation to ensure families are connected to the resources they

need.

Operational Challenges for Early Years Programs

The following operational challenges, common to almost all early years programs and services, were

identified:

Lack of adequate space to offer programs;

Lack of transportation support for families and time spent travelling for staff;

Lack of budget to advertise programs and engage in community outreach;

Lack of services in rural communities due to low attendance across geographically isolated areas;

Lack of ability to recruit and retain Registered Early Child Educators (RECEs);

Lack of consistency in programming; and

Lack of annual Provincial increases in funding since the inception of OEYCs

Gaps in Early Years Programming

Gaps in existing early years programs identified by parents and caregivers and early years program staff

include:

Outdoors and environmental programs

Arts-based programs including music programs

Quiet and small group programs especially for children and parents with anxiety

Programs for children with special needs

Programs for specific population groups (eg., grandparents)

Programs during the winter and/or bad weather in rural communities

Opportunities for Integration and Collaboration

Community partners identified many opportunities for collaboration with OEYCFCs including co-location of

services, partnerships to reach underserved populations and enhanced referral between agencies. For

example, in order to better prepare children for school, transition meetings were suggested between early

years staff and full-day kindergarten (FDK) teachers. This may allow for the transfer of a child’s “portfolio”

from the early years program to an FDK teacher, facilitating the tracking of developmental milestones.

School boards had a willingness to expand existing programs and services. In addition, school boards were

willing to offer space where available or to expand to new sites, space permitting, to support the transition

of children from early years programs and child care into the school setting. Integration into schools will

need to consider several factors including, but not limited to, the availability of space and accommodation

rates.

Service Transition Recommendations To meet the required MEDU service goals, the CMSM is making the following recommendations with

respect to the transition of the local early years system and the management of local change.

of 62

4

Recommendations

1. The CMSM will enter into purchase of service agreements with non-profit local service providers

and/or publicly-funded school boards, and not directly operate child and family centres.

2. Service delivery agencies will be selected using the county’s procurement process via a request for

proposal (RFP). Two lead agencies be selected to provide services with satellite locations offered by

both to ensure access across the service area. One lead agency will be selected to provide services in

Prince Edward County and one lead agency will be selected to provide services in Lennox and

Addington.

3. The CMSM will provide an in-person training session for prospective agencies to support the

completion of proposals in response to the RFP.

4. CMSM staff resources will be allocated to support the key functions of system coordination and

planning, data collection, reporting and system quality assurance. The CMSM will seek additional staff

resources, if necessary, to ensure that each of these functions are met.

5. In order to build capacity and meet the needs of parents/caregivers, all child and family program staff

in the Counties of Prince Edward and Lennox and Addington should hold a Registered Early Childhood

Educator (RECE) designation or be in the process of completing their RECE designation.

6. Core services should be offered in different centres on different days of the week, including Saturdays,

year-round.

7. Schools should be prioritized for early years child and family programs where possible and where

known concerns (i.e., accommodation rates) can be overcome.

8. The CMSM will work with the lead agency, once selected, in Prince Edward County to negotiate specific

locations for programming and/or services. Priority neighborhoods may include, but are not limited to,

Picton, Wellington and Massassaga-Rednersville.

9. The CMSM will work with the lead agency, once selected, in Lennox and Addington to negotiate

specific locations for programming and/or services. Priority neighborhoods may include, but are not

limited to, Amherstview in Loyalist Township, Yarker/Newburgh/Centreville in Stone Mills Township,

Cloyne/Northbrook in Addington Highlands and Napanee in Greater Napanee.

10. All OEYCFC programming should concentrate on mandatory core programming and services. The

CMSM will work in collaboration with lead agencies to identify opportunities for optional service

delivery methods (i.e., virtual) if required to meet the mandatory core programming and community

needs.

11. French language services should be embedded in OEYCFC programming and services. Given the small

percentage of Francophone families, the CMSM should leverage existing community partners to

provide French services and meet the needs of Francophone families in the community.

12. The CMSM will work with Indigenous led organizations to build the capacity and availability of

culturally relevant programming. The CMSM will partner with other CMSMs and a lead Indigenous

organization to complete the Journey Together funding proposal to ensure that early years programs

and services reflect Indigenous cultures. Cultural competency training will be provided to early years

staff, administrators and managers.

of 62

5

13. OEYCFCs in Prince Edward and Lennox and Addington Counties will be collaborative and active partners

in the implementation of the Special Needs Strategy as it relates to coordinated service planning for

families with children with special and complex needs. OEYCFC staff will be trained in the protocols for

coordinated service planning, including referring families to supports.

Change Management Plan This section outlines the change management procedure, inclusive of tasks that the CMSM could employ to

successfully implement OEYCFCs.

PELASS understands that 2018 will be a year of transition. In order to minimize service disruption, PELASS

will enter into service agreements with the existing two agencies from January 1, 2018 (when PELASS

becomes responsible for these programs) to the end of June 2018. Maintaining status quo during these

months will allow families to continue to use existing services while PELASS takes the steps necessary to

procure OEYCFC service delivery agencies.

The CMSM will develop a communications strategy. In addition, the CMSM may host an in-person session

with early years program staff and managers, and external stakeholders as appropriate, to share

information on the community needs assessment and next steps in the transition.

The CMSM will develop a community planning processes for ongoing input and review of services. The

CMSM will conduct this planning to ensure that core services are designed and delivered in ways that are

responsive to diverse populations and in alignment with local needs. The CMSM will use MEDU funding to

facilitate collaborative program planning, foster partnerships and enhance public awareness related to

early years programs.

The CMSM will support responsive early years service system planning decisions through engagement, joint

planning and coordination between the CMSM and local partners. This engagement will ensure that

CMSMs are developing service system plans that are reflective of existing capacity and community goals

and priorities. The CMSM will leverage existing expertise within the local community to provide high quality

child and family programs.

of 62

6

Chapter 1: Introduction

Purpose This initial plan outlines the transition plan that the County of Lennox and Addington, as Consolidated

Municipal Service Manager (CMSM), will undertake to implement the new Ontario Early Years Child and

Family Centres (OEYCFCs) beginning in 2018.

Background The Province of Ontario has made a commitment to modernize child care and early years programming. As

part of this commitment the Ministry of Education announced its intention to transform Ministry funded

child and family programs into an increasingly integrated cohesive system of services and supports for

children 0-6 years and their parents and caregivers, known as OEYCFC. The County of Lennox and

Addington, as CMSM, is responsible for managing the new OEYCFCs in Prince Edward County and the

County of Lennox and Addington.

The Ministry of Education (MEDU) has provided several guiding documents to support the transition to

OEYCFCs, including:

How Does Learning Happen: Ontario’s Pedagogy for the Early Years

Ontario’s Renewed Early Years and Child Care Policy Framework

OEYCFC Planning Guidelines for Service Managers

OEYCFC Business Practices and Funding Guidelines for Service System Managers

To support this vision, OEYCFC programs and services will be guided by the following principles when

developing, delivering and evaluating OEYCFC programs and services: Child and Family Centred,

Welcoming, High Quality, Inclusive, Integrated, and Community Led.

There are three core services OEYCFCs will be mandated to provide:

Engaging parents and caregivers through discussion and information sharing, pre- and postnatal

support programs, and targeted outreach activities;

Supporting early learning and development through drop-in programs and other programs and

services to build responsive adult-child relationships and to encourage children’s exploration, play

and inquiry; and

Making connections for families by responding to parent/caregiver concerns about their child’s

development through conversations and observations supported by validated resources and tools,

information sharing, referrals, and connections with specialized community services and other

available programs and services.

In addition to the mandatory core services, OEYCFCs may provide the following optional services:

Mobile services and Local Phone Lines

Virtual Services and Resources

of 62

7

The requirements for OEYCFCs programs and services are that they:

Have at least one Registered Early Childhood Educator (RECE) on each staff team

Offer centre based services at least 5 days a week including a weekend day

Offer French language programs and services in designated areas under the French Language

Services Act

Offer programs and services that reflect local Indigenous cultures

The following restrictions apply to OEYCFC programs and services:

Child minding services are only permitted during parenting education programs when the

parents remain on site

Programs are community - based and not to be offered within individual homes.

Setting the Stage The Ministry of Education currently funds early years programs in the Counties of Prince Edward and

Lennox and Addington through:

Ontario Early Years Centres, and

Child Care Resource Centres

To prepare for the transformation of Ministry funded child and family programs into an integrated,

cohesive system of services and supports, the Children’s Services Division of Prince Edward-Lennox and

Addington Social Services (PELASS) undertook a comprehensive community consultation including a local

needs assessment and facilitation of meaningful engagement with key community partners, parents and

caregivers.

The following key questions were developed to guide the findings and analysis contained in this report:

1. What are the needs of families with children aged 0 to 6 with respect to types of services,

locations, and time availability?

2. What are the benefits of the current early years programs?

3. What are the current gaps, barriers and challenges of the early years programs?

4. How can the requirements of the Ministry of Education be balanced with community needs?

In order for PELASS to address these key questions with parents, caregivers and key community partners, it

is imperative that the CMSM fully understands the current demographics of Prince Edward and Lennox and

Addington, and how it affects families and their children aged 0 to 6 years.

Current Situation in Prince Edward and Lennox and Addington Lennox and Addington Lennox and Addington is defined by Statistics Canada as a census division that consists of 4 census

subdivisions: the Township of Addington Highlands, the Town of Greater Napanee, Loyalist Township and

the Township of Stone Mills. The total population for Lennox and Addington, according to 2016 Census

of 62

8

data1, is 42,888.2 The population has increased from 41,809 in 2011 and 40,542 in 2006. According to the

2016 Census data, there are 13,000 families in private households.

Prince Edward County

Prince Edward County is defined by Statistics Canada as a census tract with no further subdivisions. The

County has 9 electoral wards (Ameliasburgh, Athol, Bloomfield and Hallowell, Hillier, North Marysburgh,

Picton, Sophiasburgh, South Marysburgh, Wellington).3 The total population for Prince Edward County,

according to 2016 Census data4, was 24,735. The population has declined from 25,258 in 2011 and 25,496

in 2006. According to the 2016 Census data, there are 7,885 families in private households.

Children in Prince Edward and Lennox and Addington

Table 1: Number of Children 0-4 years in Prince Edward and Lennox and Addington (2016 Census)

Geographic Area Total

Population Children 0 to 4 yrs. % of Children 0 to 4 yrs.

Ontario 13,448,490 697,360 5.2%

Prince Edward, Lennox and Addington 67,625 2,880 4.3%

Prince Edward, County 24,735 890 3.6%

Lennox and Addington, County 42,890 1,990 4.6%

Loyalist, Township 16,970 805 4.7%

Greater Napanee, Town 15,890 730 4.6%

Stone Mills, Township 7,700 380 4.9%

Addington Highlands, Township 2,320 75 3.2%

According to the 2016 Census data1, the 0 to 4 years age range makes up approximately 4.3% of the total

population in Prince Edward and Lennox and Addington. Within the area, there is a higher representation

of children aged 0 to 4 years in Lennox and Addington (4.6%) compared to Prince Edward County (3.6%).

Compared to the 2011 Census, the population of children aged 0-4 has not significantly changed in either

Lennox and Addington or Prince Edward County.

The data above shows that families with children aged 0 to 4 years tend to live in higher populated areas

including Loyalist Township, Greater Napanee and Stone Mills. Addington Highlands, has the lowest total

population and representation (3.2%) of children aged 0 to 4 years in the Prince Edward and Lennox and

Addington geographic areas.

Table 2, which displays geographical representation of children aged 5 to 12 years, is consistent with the

data observed in Table 1. There has not been a significant change in children aged 5 to 12 compared to

2011, and the children tend have a higher representation within the total population in larger towns and

townships.

1 Statistics Canada. 2017. Lennox and Addington, CTY [Census division], Ontario and Ontario [Province] (table). Census Profile. 2016 Census. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 98-316-X2016001. Ottawa. Released August 2, 2017. 2 See Appendix A Figure 1 for Geographic Area of Lennox and Addington 3 See Appendix A Figure 2 for Geographic Area of Prince Edward County 4 Statistics Canada. 2017. Prince Edward County, CY [Census subdivision], Ontario and Prince Edward, CDR [Census division], Ontario (table). Census Profile. 2016 Census. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 98-316-X2016001. Ottawa. Released August 2, 2017. http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2016/dp-pd/prof/index.cfm?Lang=E (accessed August 16, 2017).

of 62

9

Table 2: Number of Children 5-12 years in Prince Edward and Lennox and Addington (2016 Census)

Geographic Area Total

Population Children 5 to 12 yrs. % of Children 5 to 12 yrs.

Ontario 13,448,490 1,209,740 9.0%

Prince Edward, Lennox and Addington 67,625 5,140 7.6%

Prince Edward, County 24,735 1,575 6.4%

Lennox and Addington, County 42,890 3,565 8.3%

Loyalist, Township 16,970 1,450 8.5%

Greater Napanee, Town 15,890 1,270 8.0%

Stone Mills, Township 7,700 695 9.0%

Addington Highlands, Township 2,320 160 6.9%

For a graphic representation of this information please refer to Figures 1 and 2 in Appendix A.

Early Development Instrument

The Early Development Instrument (EDI) was developed to measure children’s ability to meet age-appropriate expectations at school entry and developmental health. It connects the conditions of early childhood experiences to learning outcomes and future successes. The EDI is comprised of five developmental domains that represent the critical components of child development: physical health and well-being; social competence; emotional maturity; language and cognitive development; and communication and general knowledge. The EDI reports on the percentage of children considered vulnerable across the five domains and is collected over three-year cycles within the school system.

Figure 3: Percentage of Children Vulnerable in One or More Domain

37.3%32.0%

37.9% 35.5%

26.9%

18.5%

PELASS Average 33.8%

Ontario Average 29.4%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

Prince EdwardCounty

Lennox andAddington County

Town of GreaterNapanee

Loyalist Township AddingtonHighlandsTownship

Stone MillsTownship

Source: County of Lennox and Addington, 2015. The Early Development Instrument (EDI) Lennox and Addington Results

of 62

10

As indicated in Figure 3, the percentage of children within Prince Edward and Lennox and Addington, 33.8% of the 550 children, were reported to be vulnerable on at least one EDI domain. This is significantly higher than the provincial average of 29.4%, and the number of children who are reported to be vulnerable on at least one domain has increased in the past two cycles of the EDI5. Children in Prince Edward and Lennox and Addington are struggling in comparison to the rest of Ontario, and it is important to understand the gaps and barriers that these children and their families are facing.

Francophone and Indigenous Populations The Ministry of Education has a desire for more culturally responsive early years options. CMSMs are

required to provide French-language services where there is an identified need and to offer programs and

services that reflect local Indigenous cultures. As Francophone and Indigenous populations vary by region,

an analysis of these populations in Prince Edward and Lennox and Addington needs to be conducted before

program planning can begin. In Prince Edward and Lennox and Addington, 1.8% of individuals can be

identified as Francophone, while 3.2% identify as Indigenous.

Francophone data is reported from the 2016 Statistics Canada Census. Francophone refers to the first

language learned at home in childhood and still understood by the individual at the time of census6. The

Indigenous population numbers reflect the Aboriginal Identity question in the 2011 National Household

Survey (NHS)7. Aboriginal identity refers to whether the person reported being an Aboriginal person, that

is, First Nations (North American Indian, Métis or Inuk (Inuit) and/or being a Registered or Treaty Indian

(that is, registered under the Indian Act of Canada) and/or being a member of a First Nation or Indian Band.

Table 3: Percentage of Indigenous and Francophone Persons in Prince Edward and Lennox and Addington

Geographic Area Francophone Population

Francophone Population (%)

Indigenous Population

Indigenous Population (%)

Prince Edward, Lennox and Addington 1145 1.8% 2125 3.2%

Prince Edward, County 345 1.4% 620 2.5%

Lennox and Addington, County 800 1.9% 1505 3.6%

Loyalist, Township 460 3.0% 530 3.3%

Greater Napanee, Town 220 1.5% 625 4.0%

Stone Mills, Township 85 1.1% 155 2.1%

Addington Highlands, Township 30 1.3% Data Supressed7 Data Supressed8

The 2011 NHS data8 was used in reporting the Indigenous populations as no other data sources (i.e. 2016

Census) were yet available at the time of writing. The 2011 NHS data reports that within Prince Edward and

Lennox and Addington (4.0%) there is a significantly higher representation of Aboriginal children aged 0-4

compared to Ontario (3.4%). This is important in future planning and funding of programs to ensure that

the provincial goal of more culturally responsive early years programs can be achieved. See Appendix A

Figures 4 and 5 to see a distribution of the Francophone and Indigenous populations in the two counties.

5 County of Lennox and Addington, 2015. The Early Development Instrument (EDI) Lennox and Addington Results 6 Statistics Canada. 2017. Lennox and Addington, CTY [Census division], Ontario and Ontario [Province] (table). Census Profile. 2016 Census. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 98-316-X2016001. Ottawa. Released August 2, 2017. 7 Data supressed due to insufficient sample size. 8 Statistics Canada. 2011. National Household Survey. Catalogue number:99-011-X2011026

of 62

11

Service Inventory

Existing Ministry of Education Funded Early Years Programs

The Ministry of Education currently funds early years programs in the Counties of Prince Edward and

Lennox and Addington through Ontario Early Years Centres and Child Care Resource Centres. Programming

is currently being provided by two agencies; Lennox and Addington Resources for Children (LARC) and The

HUB Child and Family Centre (The HUB).

LARC LARC is a non-profit, charitable organization committed to meeting the diverse needs and demands of

children and families in the community of Lennox and Addington. It does this by providing quality

educational programs and resources based on best practices and through a multi-service approach that

allows children, parents, staff and home child care providers to strengthen community and family

relationships. Support, advocacy and programming for children has been offered since 1987.

LARC provides early years and child care services including licensed centre based programs, nursery school

program, school age programs, licensed home chid care program, special needs resourcing program and

early years programming.

The HUB

The HUB is a not for profit organization serving the children and families of Prince Edward County since

1989. The organization is dedicated to providing the families of The County with quality early learning and

child care services. It does this through the provision of a number of programs and services focusing on

children 0-12 years old. The organization operates as a hub providing early years and child care services

including licensed centre based care, school age programs, preschool and nursery school programs,

licensed home child care program, special needs enhanced support resources and early years

programming.

Early years programming can include early learning activities such as playgroups, drop-ins, specialty

programs, referrals, pre and post natal supports, and parent education and resources. Collaboration with

other service providers such as Public Health, Aboriginal Healthy Babies Healthy Children Program, and

Early Literacy ensure enriched programs, supports, activities and education are offered for families in both

counties. Programs and services are offered at the main Ontario Early Years Centre in both counties, as well

as at several outreach locations to support families in rural communities. Early years programs are

distributed throughout Prince Edward and Lennox and Addington. The following maps (Figures 6 and

Figure 7) display the distribution of programs across two age groups; 0-4 years and 5-12 years.

of 62

12

Figure 6: Map of Early Years Programs in Prince Edward and Lennox and Addington for Children 0-4 yrs

of 62

13

Figure 7: Map of Early Years Programs in Prince Edward and Lennox and Addington for Children 5-12 yrs

of 62

14

Chapter 2: Local Needs Assessment

Introduction A local needs assessment was undertaken to understand the needs of parents and caregivers with children

aged 0-6 living in the Counties of Prince Edward and Lennox and Addington. The needs assessment

approach was used to understand the current state, successes and gaps, and how to best transition to the

Ontario Early Years Child and Family Centres model.

The needs assessment was conducted amongst two main groups; parents and caregivers, and community

partners. Different methodological approaches were used for each target group. Data collection techniques

were designed to optimize the quality of data for each identified group. This section will provide a

summary of the local needs assessment including methodology, participant recruitment, findings, and

recommendations regarding the needs of parents and caregivers with children aged 0 to 6 years.

Methodology Multiple methods were used to target a wide range of stakeholders across the counties of Prince Edward

and Lennox and Addington. A summary of the engagement methods is presented in Appendix A Table 4.

The engagement methods have been organized by two stakeholders, parents and caregivers and

community partners.

Parents and Caregivers

Definition

Parents and caregivers were defined as individuals caring for children under the age of 10 with an emphasis

on parents and caregivers with children between 0-6 years. This group included both users and non-service

users of the existing Ministry of Education funded early years programs.

Engagement Strategy

A variety of engagement strategies were used to reach parents and caregivers including:

Online Parent and Caregiver Survey

Pop-Up Consultations

Indigenous Sharing Circle

Online Parent and Caregiver Survey

Community members across the counties of Prince Edward and Lennox and Addington were provided the

opportunity to complete an online survey about early years programs and services. The survey was offered

in both English and French and elicited information on the early years programs and services offered,

program strengths, program challenges, program attendance and other topics. The survey was hosted

through Survey Monkey and was available from April 3rd, 2017 to April 21st, 2017. The survey was

advertised on the PELASS website and promoted through community partners.

Pop-Up Consultations

Community members across the counties of Prince Edward and Lennox and Addington were provided the

opportunity to participate in a pop-up consultation. A pop-up consultation is where a community member

of 62

15

completes a short survey (i.e. less than 2 minutes) at a community location. Pop-up consultations are an

innovative approach to encourage meaningful participation from diverse stakeholders. Pop-up

consultations address the two largest barriers to participation, time and transportation. Questions were

asked to identify program attendance and satisfaction with service delivery. Using this method, responses

to specific questions were collected at the locations people frequent including, arenas and libraries. Due to

the nature of pop-up consultations, no advertising or marketing was done in advance of the pop-up

consultations.


An Indigenous Sharing Circle was held on May 8th, 2017 at the Napanee Area Community Health Centre. A

culturally appropriate light dinner was provided as was transportation support (i.e. gas gift cards). All

participants joined in creating ‘corn husk dolls’; a traditional activity led by the Indigenous Community

Development Worker at the Napanee Community Health Centre. In addition, the Aboriginal Healthy Babies

Healthy Children worker was in attendance. The Indigenous Sharing Circle asked participants about

program strengths, program challenges, future programming, and important factors for Indigenous

Families to attend early years programs.

Community Partners

Definition

This stakeholder group included a variety of agencies and organizational staff that support families and

children through programs and services. Community partners included front line early years staff and

directors and supervisors, kindergarten staff, licensed child care providers, school board early years leads

and health and social service community agencies.

Engagement Strategy

A variety of engagement strategies were used to reach community partners including:

Online Partner Agency Survey

Telephone Interviews

Community Conversations

Online Partner Agency Survey

Partner agencies, targeted at health and social services, across the counties of Prince Edward and Lennox

and Addington were provided the opportunity to complete an online survey about early years programs

and services. The survey was offered in English. The survey was hosted through Survey Monkey and was

available from April 3rd, 2017 to April 21st, 2017. The survey was promoted through an invitational email.

Telephone Interviews

Early years (EY) leads, supervisors and directors were invited to take part in a private telephone interview.

Each interview lasted approximately one hour. A targeted set of questions was developed for each

stakeholder and, in general, elicited information on the early years programs and services offered, program

strengths, program challenges, needs of families and their children aged 0-6, barriers for priority

populations and opportunities for the transition to OEYCFCs.

of 62

16

Community Conversations

Front-line early years staff were invited to participate in a community conversation. In addition, licensed

child care providers and full day kindergarten staff were invited to participate in a separate community

conversation. During the facilitated community conversation, participants had the opportunity to engage in

both small and large group discussions and to provide anonymous written comments. A focused set of

questions was developed for each stakeholder group. Participants were able to discuss what they thought

was working well with the existing early years programs and services, opportunities for future OEYCFCs,

and program and service barriers and gaps. Questions were also asked with respect to early years programs

for priority populations. French interpretation was provided upon request. Managers were asked not to

attend these sessions in order to provide staff a space where they felt comfortable discussing programming

challenges openly. Light meals were provided at community conversations.

Outreach and CommunicationOutreach for Parents and Caregivers

The focus of the marketing and outreach strategy was to enhance participation in the online survey. The

online parent and caregiver survey was promoted through the PELASS website, Facebook and Twitter. As of

April 5th, 2017 (only 2 days after the survey went “live online”), the poster on Facebook had reached 1,133

people with 50 post clicks. Likewise, as of April 5th, 2017, the Tweet on Twitter had reached 273

Impressions (i.e., the number of times a user is served a promoted tweet in a timeline).

A poster was developed and shared with community partners as a digital file to print and post in their

locations, or to share through their communication channels including social media. A postcard version of

the poster was printed and shared with community partners to disseminate to their clientele. A French

version of the poster was jointly created with the City of Kingston and County of Frontenac and shared

digitally with local French school boards to disseminate to parents, and caregivers.

For the Indigenous Sharing Circle, an invitation poster was developed. The poster invitation was distributed

by the Indigenous Healthy Babies Healthy Children worker and distributed though the local planning tables

and their Indigenous committees (First Nation, Metis and Inuit (FMNI) and Kingston, Frontenac, Lennox and

Addington (KFLA) Indigenous Circle).

Outreach for Community Partners

The online partner agency survey was targeted to health and social service community agencies. Agencies

were identified by PELASS and an invitational email to participate was sent by PELASS staff.

An invitational letter was developed to promote the community conversations. Staff were asked to

respond in advance of the community conversations. Managers were invited to participate in an interview

by email. A follow-up reminder email was sent in advance of the meeting.

Analysis Data synthesis and qualitative and quantitative data analysis was completed. Thematic analysis methods

were used to code the data collected during the engagement process for partners, parents and caregivers.

The needs of families with children aged 0-6 were analyzed in their entirety, as well as individually by

of 62

17

priority and engagement method. A distribution of survey respondents has been mapped by postal code

and provided in Appendix A Figure 8.

The following section summarizes the data analysis from the needs assessment conducted by the CMSM

and provides key themes reflective of the questions that guided the community consultation.

1. What are the needs of families with children aged 0 to 6 with respect to types of services,

locations, and time availability?

The needs of families with children aged 0-6 were analyzed as a whole, as well as individually by priority

population (Francophone, Indigenous, and rural populations) and engagement method (pop-up

consultation vs. online survey) to see if there were any differences in needs between population groups.

The comparative analysis did not reveal any noteworthy differences between population groups.

Accordingly, the following section provides insight on the top preferences identified by parents and

caregivers as a whole. Where differences were identified between priority populations and/or engagement

methods, they are noted.

Preferred Types of Services

Parents and caregivers prefer programs that are “drop-in” compared to registered, structured programs.

Longer “drop-in” hours would help to accommodate working schedules.

When deciding to attend early years programs, the most important factors that parents and caregivers

consider, in priority, are:

Program Schedule (36%)

Location (31%)

Choice of Programming (29%)

The majority of parents and caregivers who participated in the online surveys had attended playgroups in

the past and would be interested in attending playgroups in the future. Other types of programs that

parents and caregivers would be interested in include story time, workshop and information sessions and

toy and parent resource lending libraries.

For participants at the Indigenous Sharing Circle, most would be interested in participating in Indigenous-

specific activities such as land based programming, drumming circles, and traditional craft activities such as

corn husk doll and dream catcher making programs. Indigenous programs and services should be

Indigenous led and inclusive of all children. This inclusiveness should extend to family members including

grandparents and community knowledge keepers.

Preferred Program Days and Times

Parents and caregivers prefer programs that are on weekdays (Monday to Friday). This was followed by a

preference for programs on Saturdays.

of 62

18

Parents and caregivers prefer programs that are in the morning (8am-12noon). This includes the mornings

of both weekdays and weekends. For participants at the Indigenous Sharing Circle, participants would

prefer weekday programs in the morning and weekend programs in the afternoons.

Preferred Program Locations

Parents and caregivers prefer programs in the following locations:

Schools (62%)

Ontario Early Years Centres (61%)

Libraries (55%)

Community Recreation Centres (48%)

The preference for schools is aligned with the Ministry of Education “schools-first” approach.

For participants at the Indigenous Sharing Circle, locations for programs should consider the following:

Preference for land-based programming that is outside and includes nature;

Indoor program space that can accommodate smudging and burning tobacco and sweet grass (i.e.,

consider fire code); and

Lack of transportation is a major barrier to participation.

Most parents and caregivers would be willing to:

Walk up to 15 minutes to attend a program (30%); and

Drive 15-30 minutes to attend a program (57%)

It is important to note that family car was the mode of transportation selected by almost all survey

respondents for how they usually travel to activities. However, from an equity perspective, it is imperative

to consider location of programs that are accessible to all parents and caregivers. This is especially relevant

in rural locations where public transportation and taxi access is limited or non-existent. Moreover, most

parents and caregivers responding to the online survey attend the programs in Picton and Napanee and

prefer to continue to attend programs in these locations.

Ongoing Communication and Engagement with Parents and Caregivers

Parents and caregivers prefer to hear about child and family programs, events and services via online

methods. This reflects the data from both the online survey and pop-up consultations. The top

communication medium identified was “Facebook”. Other online platforms include Instagram and the use

of email distribution lists. Text messaging was also suggested as a communication method.

Word of mouth was often suggested as an alternative mode of communication to share information about

programs and services. This is important for parents and caregivers lacking internet access at home. For

participants at the Indigenous Sharing Circle, lack of awareness of the programs was considered a barrier to

participation and should be considered for any mode of communication.

of 62

19

2. What are the benefits of the current early years programs?

The existing Ministry of Education funded early years programs have many strengths which is evidenced by

program attendance. Approximately half (47%) of parents and caregivers reported that they attend any of

the programs offered on a regular basis. There were numerous benefits attributed to these existing

programs by parents and caregivers, front-line staff, program managers and directors, and community

partners.

For parents and caregivers, the biggest benefits of the early years programs were that their child enjoyed

the program (87%), that they felt welcomed (83%), and that they met parents with children around the

same age (73%). Online survey respondents also provided many comments about the programs preparing

children for school, providing inter-disciplinary education from public health, and the friendliness of staff.

For participants at the Indigenous Sharing Circle, the parenting programs and workshops were appreciated

for being child - friendly, having hands - on activities and being accessible because they are offered at no

cost to participants.

Early years staff and community partners described the greatest benefits of the existing early years

programs as providing quality programming, being responsive to family needs, establishing trusting

relationships, and providing system navigation to ensure families are connected to the resources they

need.

3. What are the current gaps, barriers and challenges of the early years programs?

Operational Challenges

The following operational challenges, common to almost all early years programs and services, were

identified:

Lack of adequate space to offer programs;

Lack of transportation support for families and time spent travelling for staff;

Lack of budget to advertise programs and engage in community outreach;

Lack of services in rural communities due to low attendance across geographically isolated areas;

Lack of ability to recruit and retain Registered Early Child Educators (RECEs);

Lack of consistency in programming; and

Lack of annual Provincial increases in funding since the inception of OEYCs.

Gaps in Early Years Programming

Gaps in existing early years programs identified by parents and caregivers and early years program staff

include:

Outdoors and environmental programs

Arts-based programs including music programs

Quiet and small group programs especially for children and parents with anxiety

Programs for children with special needs

Programs for specific population groups (e.g. grandparents)

Programs during the winter and/or bad weather in rural communities

of 62

20

Barriers and Opportunities to Enhance Participation

Indigenous Programming

Based on the community partners’ survey results, most organizations (77%) are unsure or feel that the

unique needs of Indigenous families are not being met.

The biggest barriers (perceived or real) for organizations to provide services for Indigenous families include

lack of language support to provide programs and services in Indigenous languages, insufficient Indigenous

clientele, lack of self-identification by families and lack of cultural competency training for non-Indigenous

staff.

To enhance participation by Indigenous families, the following suggestions were provided by early years

program staff and community partners:

Consult with Indigenous families on an ongoing basis including a survey of needs

Incorporate Indigenous teachings and learnings into all programs

Hire staff with Indigenous backgrounds that can provide culturally competent programs

Provide outdoor space for land-based programming

Offer programs in areas close to where Indigenous families are living

Have culturally appropriate resources

Offer meals and transportation support

Provide small group formats to decrease anxiety and fear of judgement

Francophone Programming

Community partners also reported in the survey that a majority of organizations (62%) are unsure if the

unique needs of Francophone families are being met. The biggest barriers (perceived or real) for

organizations to provide services for Francophone families include difficulty recruiting and retaining

French-speaking staff, cost of translating materials and insufficient clientele to sustain Francophone

programs.

To enhance participation of Francophone families, the following suggestions were provided by early years

program staff and community partners:

Consult with Francophone families on an ongoing basis including a survey of needs

Hire bilingual staff

Translate printed materials into French

Offer programs, in collaboration with other organizations, in the areas close to where French-

speaking families are living

Rural Programming

Interestingly, more than half of organizations who completed the community partners survey (56%) feel

the unique needs of families living in rural communities are being met. The biggest barriers (perceived or

real) for organizations to provide services for families living in rural communities are lack of: transportation,

program awareness and staffing.

of 62

21

To enhance participation of families living in rural communities, the following suggestions were provided

by early years program staff and community partners:

Increase awareness through marketing and outreach to the rural communities

Offer transportation support

Extend drop-in times to allow for greater flexibility of programs

Increase frequency of programming

Hire additional staff

Partner with other organizations

4. How can the requirements of the Ministry of Education be balanced with community needs?

Throughout the community engagement process, several themes emerged to help guide service planning,

which are described in more detail below.

Opportunities for Integration and Collaboration

Community partners identified many opportunities for collaboration with OEYCFCs including co-location of

services, partnerships to reach underserved populations and enhanced referral between agencies. For

example, in order to better prepare children for school, transition meetings were suggested between early

years staff and full-day kindergarten (FDK) teachers. This may allow for the transferring of a child’s

“portfolio” from the early years program to an FDK teacher, facilitating the tracking of developmental

milestones.

School boards had a willingness to expand existing programs and services. In addition, school boards were

willing to offer space where available or to expand to new sites, space permitting to support the transition

of children from early years and child care programs into the school setting. Integration into schools will

need to consider concerns expressed such as sharing of classroom space, lack of available dedicated and/or

permanent space, and additional education for teachers and principals on the unique needs of children

aged 0-6 years. It should also be noted that the accommodation rates that schools may charge for OEYCFC

programming may have an impact on the number of programs that can be offered in a school location. A

comprehensive cost analysis will be required prior to securing opportunities for integration within the

school community.

Accessible and Inclusive Programming

Interestingly, 6% of survey respondents identified as a parent or caregiver of a child with special needs.

These parents and caregivers identified unique barriers such as not understanding if their child with special

needs could attend a program. One parent/caregiver was concerned about severe anaphylactic allergies. In

addition, accessible programs need to ensure that there is consumable water as one community partner

expressed lack of drinkable water as a concern. Another significant barrier identified with respect to

accessibility was mental health and anxiety challenges of both children and parents and caregivers.

Overall, the majority of respondents stated that their organization was accessible. Although this finding is

positive, the guiding principle for all OEYCFCs is that they are inclusive of all children. To enhance the

accessibility and inclusiveness of programs, program sites should be physically accessible. Child friendly

of 62

22

spaces should consider nutrition, water and hygiene as well as protection for children who are vulnerable

and/or disabled.

Culturally Appropriate Programming

As part of the government-wide action plan in The Journey Together: Ontario’s Commitment to

Reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples, the CMSM is responsible for creating and supporting the number of

off-reserve culturally relevant programs for children and families. Programs should be stimulating for

Indigenous children and be located in safe, secure and supportive environments.

In order to facilitate culturally appropriate programming, it is imperative for front-line staff and managers

to be trained in cultural competency. This is especially important as many front-line staff felt that they did

not know enough about the history, culture and unique needs of Indigenous families. In addition, programs

must be Indigenous-led and include culturally appropriate resources and materials. Given a culture where

many people are afraid to self-identify, inclusive programming should be offered at all program sites to

ensure any parent, caregiver or child feels welcomed. Partnership with local Indigenous organizations

provides an excellent opportunity to solicit input and guidance on an ongoing basis into early years

programming and resource materials.

Summary of Findings The needs assessment has provided the CMSM with data and information that has helped address the

needs of families with children aged 0 to 6 years, the benefits of current early years programs for families,

the current gaps, barriers and challenges that early years programs face, and how the requirements of the

Ministry of Education can be balanced with community needs. By understanding the current situation for

families and their children in Prince Edward and Lennox and Addington, the CMSM is able to provide

considerations for future planning and service delivery.

Suggested Considerations To meet the needs of families in the counties of Prince Edward and Lennox and Addington, the CMSM

recommends the following be taken into consideration when designing OEYCFC services.

1. OEYCFC programs and services should build on existing strengths. It is imperative to recognize and acknowledge the current strengths of programs and services in the counties of Prince Edward and Lennox and Addington and to continue building upon the solid foundation that currently exists.

2. Any transition should be focused on minimizing service disruptions for children, parents and caregivers through a seamless transition process.

3. Programs should be offered during the week (Monday to Friday) with at least one program on Saturday. Programs should be offered in the morning with at least one afternoon and one evening program to accommodate schedules.

4. Programs should be “drop-in” when possible to allow for more flexibility and “drop-in” hours should be extended where possible in all program schedules. Despite inclement weather and bus cancellations, programs should remain open whenever possible.

5. Program locations should be physically accessible spaces. Locations that are not physically accessible spaces (i.e., church basements) should not be considered as safe, child-friendly, and inclusive environments.

of 62

23

6. Prioritized locations for programs should include schools, existing Ontario Early Years Centres, libraries and community recreation centres. Priority should be given to sites where early years programs can be permanently located.

7. Front-line staff and managers should receive cultural competency training. This cultural competency training should be with respect to not only Indigenous families but to newcomer, immigrant and refugee families in Prince Edward and Lennox and Addington counties.

8. Indigenous resources and culturally appropriate toys and activities should be included and be prominently displayed in all existing and future OEYCFC programs and services.

9. OEYCFC programs and services should consider innovative solutions to reduce known barriers for families. This may include the following:

a. Transportation support (i.e., gas cards, carpooling lists); b. Meal support (i.e., healthy snacks at all programs); and c. Relaxation techniques for parents/caregivers (i.e. positive coping statements, cup of tea).

10. A recruitment and retention strategy should be developed to ensure there are sufficient Registered Early Childhood Educators in the counties, particularly with respect to Francophone and bilingual staff.

11. An up-to-date service inventory should be maintained (i.e., 211) for partners, parents and caregivers to learn about what programs are available and where they can be accessed. The inventory should be available online through Facebook, and by word-of-mouth.

12. A communication strategy should be developed to inform early years program managers, front-line early years staff, community agencies and existing service users about the service transition and how specific programs and services may or may not be affected.

of 62

24

Chapter 3: Service Transition Recommendations

Introduction

The Ministry of Education has identified a suite of mandatory core services that must be available to

children and families in the counties of Prince Edward and Lennox and Addington. The County of Lennox

and Addington, as CMSM, must manage the local delivery of core services related to:

Engaging parents and caregivers,

Supporting early learning and development, and

Making connections for families.

To meet these service goals the CMSM is making the following recommendations with respect to the

transition of the local early years system and the management of local change.

Recommendations 1. The CMSM will enter into purchase of service agreements with non-profit local service providers

and/or publicly-funded school boards, and not directly operate child and family centres.

2. Service delivery agencies will be selected using the county’s procurement process via a request for proposal (RFP). Two lead agencies be selected to provide services with satellite locations offered by both to ensure access across the service area. One lead agency will be selected to provide services in Prince Edward County and one lead agency will be selected to provide services in Lennox and Addington.

3. The CMSM will provide an in-person training session for prospective agencies to support the completion of proposals in response to the RFP.

4. CMSM staff resources will be allocated to support the key functions of system coordination and planning, data collection, reporting and system quality assurance. The CMSM will seek additional staff resources, if necessary, to ensure that each of these functions are met.

5. In order to build capacity and meet the needs of parents/caregivers, all child and family program staff in the Counties of Prince Edward and Lennox and Addington should hold a Registered Early Childhood Educator (RECE) designation or be in the process of completing their RECE designation.

6. Core services should be offered in different centres on different days of the week, including Saturdays, year-round.

7. Schools should be prioritized for early years child and family programs where possible and where known concerns (i.e., accommodation rates) can be overcome.

8. The CMSM will negotiate with the lead agency, once selected, in Prince Edward County to negotiate specific locations for programming and/or services. Priority neighborhoods may include, but are not limited to, Picton, Wellington and Massassaga-Rednersville.

9. The CMSM will negotiate with the lead agency, once selected, in Lennox and Addington to negotiate specific locations for programming and/or services. Priority neighborhoods may include, but are not limited to, Amherstview in Loyalist Township, Yarker/Newburgh/Centreville in Stone Mills Township, Cloyne/Northbrook in Addington Highlands and Napanee in Greater Napanee.

10. All OEYCFC programming should concentrate on mandatory core programming and services. The CMSM will work in collaboration with lead agencies to identify opportunities for optional service

of 62

25

delivery methods (i.e., virtual) if required to meet the mandatory core programming and community needs.

11. French language services should be embedded in OEYCFC programming and services. Given the small percentage of Francophone families, the CMSM should leverage existing community partners to provide French services and meet the needs of Francophone families in the community.

12. The CMSM will work with Indigenous led organizations to build the capacity and availability of culturally relevant programming. The CMSM will partner with other CMSMs and a lead Indigenous organization to complete the Journey Together funding proposal to ensure that early years programs and services reflect Indigenous cultures. Cultural competency training will be provided to early years staff, administrators and managers.

13. OEYCFCs in Prince Edward and Lennox and Addington Counties will be collaborative and active partners in the implementation of the Special Needs Strategy as it relates to coordinated service planning for families with children with special and complex needs. OEYCFC staff will be trained in the protocols for coordinated service planning, including referring families to supports.

of 62

26

Chapter 4: Change Management Plan

Introduction This chapter outlines the change management procedure, inclusive of tasks that the CMSM will use

successfully implement OEYCFCs. The Ministry of Education will enter into a service agreement with the

CMSM after which the CMSM will be responsible for the local management of OEYCFCs within the PELASS

service area.

Service Transition PELASS understands that 2018 will be a year of transition. In order to minimize service disruption, PELASS

will enter into service agreements with the existing two OEYC agencies from January 1, 2018 (when PELASS

becomes responsible for these programs) to the end of June 2018. Maintaining status quo during these

months will allow families to continue to use existing services while PELASS takes the steps necessary to

procure service delivery agencies under the new OEYCFC guidelines.

Performance Measurement Performance measurement goes beyond the funding reporting requirements to qualitatively and

quantitatively measure the impact of programs and services. Upon receipt of the OEYCFC Outcomes

Framework being developed by MEDU, the CMSM will develop an evaluation and performance

measurement strategy. Upon completion of the measurement strategy, the necessary tools will be created

to capture the qualitative and quantitative data reflective of the OEYCFC Outcomes Framework, as well as

the local context, and to further expand on existing key performance indicators.

Communications for Change Management The CMSM will develop a communications strategy. The communication strategy will be tailored to

parents/caregivers and will include relevant service transformation information. A specific part of the

strategy will be tailored to Indigenous families. In addition, a separate section of the strategy will be

tailored to, but not limited to, early years program staff, administrators, partner agencies, licensed child

care providers, school boards and elected officials. The strategy will include strategic messaging on the

timeline for transition, educational requirements, and/or future operational changes.

As part of the broader communication strategy, PELASS will host an in-person session with early years

program staff and managers, and external stakeholders as appropriate, to share information on the

community needs assessment and next steps in the transition. This will allow the opportunity for further

feedback from the stakeholders impacted by this transition. PELASS will capture the questions and answers

from these sessions to create a ‘Frequently Asked Questions’ (FAQ) document to further support the

comprehensive communication strategy. The FAQ will also incorporate the top change management

concerns that were shared via the online survey and community consultations during the needs

assessment phase.

The CMSM will develop strategic messaging to share information about the transition with both early years

program staff and managers as well as publicly with parents and caregivers. Information may be

of 62

27

communicated via the website, educational poster and/or local newspaper and include the fact that 2018

is considered a transition year.

Community Planning The CMSM will develop community planning processes for ongoing input and review of services. The

CMSM will conduct this planning to ensure that core services are designed and delivered in ways that are

responsive to diverse populations and in alignment with local needs. The CMSM will use MEDU funding to

facilitate collaborative program planning, foster partnerships and enhance public awareness related to

early years programs.

The CMSM will support responsive early years service system planning decisions through engagement, joint

planning and coordination between the CMSM and local partners. This engagement will ensure that

CMSMs are developing service system plans that are reflective of existing capacity and community goals

and priorities. The CMSM will leverage existing expertise within the local community to provide high quality

child and family programs.

of 62

APPENDIX A:

Supplemental Figures and Tables

of 62

A-1

Table 4: Summary of Engagement Methods

Parents and Caregivers

Engagement Method Stakeholder Engaged Date Location Respondents

Survey (English) Parent and Caregiver April 3rd-21st,2017 Online 229

Survey (French) Parent and Caregiver April 3rd-21st,2017 Online 2

Pop-Up Consultation Parent and Caregiver April 1st, 2017 Wellington Arena 35

Pop-Up Consultation Parent and Caregiver April 12th, 2017 Amherstview Branch

Library 11

Pop-Up Consultation Parent and Caregiver April 20th, 2017 Yarker Branch Library

Tamworth Branch Library Napanee Branch Library

16


Parent and Caregiver May 8th, 2017

Napanee Area Community Health Centre

4

Community Partners

Engagement Method Stakeholder Engaged Date Location Respondents

Survey English Community Partners April 3rd – 21st,

2017 Online 28

Telephone Interview District School Board Early Years Leads

March 28th-April 4th, 2017

N/A 3

Community Conversation

Front Line EY Workers April 11th, 2017 Deseronto Arena 10

Community Conversation

Licensed Child Care Providers FD Kindergarten Staff

April 20th, 2017 Strathcona Paper Centre 11

Teleconference FD Kindergarten Staff April 27th, 2017 N/A 1

Telephone Interview The HUB Child and Family Centre Staff

April 11, 2017 N/A 2

Telephone Interview LARC Executive Director April 10, 2017 N/A 1

of 62

A-2

Figure 1: Lennox and Addington Geographic Area

of 62

A-3

Figure 2: Prince Edward County Geographic Area

of 62

A-4

Figure 4: % French as Mother Tongue in Prince Edward and Lennox and Addington

of 62

A-5

Figure 5: % of Indigenous Self-Identification in Prince Edward and Lennox and Addington

of 62

A-6

Figure 8: Map of Survey OEYCFC Respondents

of 62


Prepared by:

Pam Kent, Supervisor Children’s Services

Subject:

Regulatory Registry Posting, Proposed Regulatory Amendments under the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014

Date:

October 25, 2017

Recommendation:


On August 31, 2015, the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014 (CCEYA) came into effect replacing the Day Nurseries Act (DNA). Given the transformative scope of the legislative framework for the child care and early years sector, the Ministry continues to take a multi-year, phased approach to the development and implementation of new updated regulatory requirements under the Act. Information/Discussion/Analysis:

On October 2, 2017, correspondence from Shannon Fuller, Assistant Deputy Minister with the Early Years and Child Care Division of the Ministry of Education announced the next phase of proposed regulatory amendments. The amendments are now posted on the Regulatory Registry and are available for public comment until December 1, 2017. The Ministry is proposing the following regulatory changes:

• Reducing the administrative burden for licensees, as many requirements are duplicative and/or under the authority of another legislative body such as public health, fire etc.;

• Clarifying language to align with the intent of current policy and practice; • Increasing administrative penalties in order to provide the Ministry with additional tools apart

from the revocation of a license to protect the health safety and well-being of children; and • Extending prohibited practices to individuals, which would allow the Ministry to take

enforcement action against the licensee, employee, volunteer or student, or home child care provider, who engaged in prohibited practices.

PELASS Children’s Services staff will be providing a response to the proposed regulatory amendments.

of 62

Financial Impact:

This report has no financial impact. Attachments:

Memorandum to Early Years and Child Care Partners – Regulatory Registry Posting – October 2, 2017.pdf Approvals:


of 62

Ministry of Education Early Years and Child Care Division

Mowat Block, 24th floor 900 Bay St. Queen’s Park Toronto ON M7A 1L2

Ministère de l'Éducation Division de la petite enfance et de la garde d'enfants

Édifice Mowat, 24e étage 900, rue Bay Queen’s Park Toronto ON M7A 1L2

MEMORANDUM TO: Early Years and Child Care Partners

FROM: Shannon Fuller Assistant Deputy Minister Early Years and Child Care Division

DATE: October 2, 2017

SUBJECT: Regulatory Registry Posting, Proposed Regulatory Amendments under the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014

Dear Early Years Partners,

As you know, on August 31, 2015, the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014 (CCEYA) came into effect replacing the Day Nurseries Act (DNA). Given the transformative scope of the legislative framework for the child care and early years sector, the ministry continues to take a multi-year, phased approach to the development and implementation of new updated regulatory requirements under the Act.

On June 6, 2017, the government released the Renewed Early Years and Child Care Policy Framework, and a vision to ensure that all children and families have access to a range of high-quality, inclusive and affordable early years and child care programs and services that are child- and family-centred and contribute to children’s learning, development and well-being.

The Ministry of Education is pleased to announce that today we are moving forward with the next phase of regulatory amendments under the CCEYA. The proposed regulatory amendments are now posted on the Regulatory Registry and available for public comment.

The proposed regulatory amendments support the implementation of the Renewed Early Years and Child Care Policy Framework as they are aligned with the commitment to increase access, affordability, responsiveness and quality of child care and early years programs and services.

These proposed regulations are based on best practices, lessons learned, and stakeholder feedback to date. The proposed regulatory amendments under the CCEYA are intended to:

• Reduce administrative burden for child care providers and families;

• Enhance enforcement;

• Clarify existing requirements for authorized recreational and skill building programs;

1

of 62

http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/childcare/renewed_early_years_child_care_policy_framework_en.pdf

http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/childcare/renewed_early_years_child_care_policy_framework_en.pdf

• Update funding regulations with current practices and policies;

• Revoke Schedule 2 age groupings and ratios and;

• Make technical amendments.

We look forward to continuing to work with you to transform the early years and child care system as part of the province’s Renewed Early Years and Child Care Policy Framework. Building on the previous phases of regulatory changes, these proposed changes will continue to refine and improve the regulatory framework while continuing to support children’s health, safety, and well-being.

The Ministry of Education values the unique and diverse perspectives of our child care and early years partners. Proposed regulatory changes will be posted on the Regulatory Registry for public comment until December 1, 2017, at this website link.

You may also send your response by e-mail to: [email protected] or by mail to:

Regulatory Registry Feedback c/o Early Years and Child Care Division Ministry of Education 900 Bay Street, 24th floor Mowat Block Toronto, ON M7A 1L2.

Thank you for your ongoing partnership in supporting the child care and early years needs of families in Ontario.

Sincerely,

Shannon Fuller Assistant Deputy Minister Early Years and Child Care Division

2

of 62

http://www.ontariocanada.com/registry/view.do?postingId=24908&language=en

mailto:[email protected]

prince edward-lennox and addington social services

Documents