Just the Tip of the Iceberg

Just the Tip of the Iceberg
Posted on September 11, 2018 | Derek Flegg | Written on September 11, 2018
Comments
Letter type:
Blog Post

Author's Note:

Author's Note:

As we began to lose confidence in the CAS there was a Province-wide funding deficit of $67 million for the CAS, and agencies had millions more in historic debts.

That was just the tip of the iceberg but the warning bells were silenced.

2013

"No one should be surprised that agencies like Peel CAS are taking extreme steps to ensure they have the funding necessary to fulfill their legislated mandates to protect children,” said Carrie Lynn Poole-Cotnam, 2013 Chair of the CUPE Ontario Social Services sector. "

March 18, 2013.

There is a Province-wide funding deficit of $67 million for Children’s Aid, and agencies shoulder millions more in historic debts. What’s happening in Peel right now is just the tip of the iceberg,” she added.

https://cupe.on.ca/archivedoc2283/

 
No one should be surprised?
 
With the society's reputation has a truer thing ever been said?
 
It's not just taking "extreme steps" it's called fraud and acting in bad faith and it's not in the best interest of the child or taxpayer - and decent honest Canadians shouldn't have been surprised the society was so willing to violate their mandate, they should have been horrified.
 
 

Author's Video Note:

The tip of the iceberg theory.
 
This theory is basically how it sounds, frauds seem like they are smaller than they actually are, or fail to show the extent of how much in fraud was committed. In other words, as the investigation moves further along, the fraud becomes unconcealed and therefore reveals how big it really is even though it didn’t seem that way much like the tip of an iceberg.
 
 
Fraud in Canadian nonprofit organizations as seen through the eyes of Canadian newspapers, 1998–2008.
 
Qiu Chen, Steven Salterio, & Pamela Murphy
Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario
 
Canada has one of the largest and most vibrant nonprofit and voluntary sectors in the world. It accounts for 6.8 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product (GDP) and employs 12 percent of Canada’s economically active population. With the significant role nonprofit organizations play in Canadian life and the increasing demand for accountability in nonprofit organizations, more attention is being drawn to nonprofit organizational fraud.
 
Media coverage on fraud in nonprofit organizations is news that catches the public’s eye and can lead to a reduction in trust in those organizations over time. This study searched Canadian national and leading regional newspapers between 1998 and 2008 for reports about frauds committed on Canadian nonprofit organizations.
 
The goal of the research was to better understand the nature of the frauds, the nonprofit organizations defrauded and the characteristics of the perpetrators, with the hope of alerting the nonprofit community to common trends.
 
 
Fraud in the not-for-profit environment
 
January 20, 2016
Learning to detect and prevent fraud is crucial to protecting the mandate and reputation of any not-for-profit organization.
 
DETECTING FRAUD
 
In a paper entitled Safeguarding Non-Profit Organizations from Fraud, KPMG LLP states that the first line of defence is to recognize the signs:
 
reconciliations are not being performed or reviewed on a timely basis and cash is not being deposited in the bank in a timely manner employees, particularly those with access to assets and/or financial accounting records, appear to be living beyond their means key records go missing when you are looking for them the financial results suggest that the NPO is doing well but the organization is suffering from a lack of cash flow, or the cash flow is not commensurate with what one would expect costs are escalating at a rate that is unexpected and inconsistent with the budget if it is an employee committing the fraud, they tend to work longer hours when others are not around to observe their activities
 
PREVENTING FRAUD
 
As important as it is to recognize the signs of fraud, the more desirable strategy is to reduce the risk of it happening. It is critical for board members and management to create strong internal controls in their organization to prevent the exploitation of any loopholes. In the paper Preventing Fraud in Not for Profit Organizations, RBC recommends some of the following:
 
separate cash handling duties
implement rigorous cash handling procedures
set up policies to prevent cheque and mail fraud
safeguard your information technology infrastructure
establish sound business practices, especially in protecting confidential data
 
To learn more about fraud detection and prevention for your not-for-profit organization, register now for the 2016 Not-For-Profit Financial Executive Forum. This forum will provide you with the tools necessary to understand how fraud happens and assess if you have the right mechanisms in place to reduce the threat of fraud.
 
 
In leaked memo, Peel CAS staff asked to keep cases open to retain funding.
 
According to the memo, when service volume (?) is lower than projected, there is less money for the CAS.
 
Ontario officials are in talks with the Peel Children’s Aid Society after a leaked memo suggested staff not close ongoing files to inflate the number of child protection cases during the month of March.
 
An anonymous employee is troubled by the memo as it raises concerns about quotas and the impact on Peel families.
 
“Peel Children’s Aid’s year-end strategies are focused on the administrative side of the work done by staff that would enable the agency to complete case files and paperwork before the end of the fiscal year, March 31, 2013. These strategies do not comprise the services we provide,” the statement read in part.
 
One of the strategies was asking child protection workers not to close any ongoing cases during the month even though, as an anonymous whistleblower alleged, the move could be detrimental to families.
 
Peel CAS executive director Rav Bains called the internal communication an “unfortunate use of language.” A statement from the agency noted that decisions are made “based on the needs of children and families.”
 
Bains said the agency does not “keep cases open unnecessarily.”
 
By 2014 after launching a new government funded advertising campaign another spokesperson for the society told reporters the society isn't responsible for or influence how many reports are made every year and as you can see number of files the society opened more than tripled in 2014.
 
 
 
Between 2011 and 2013 the 46 separate societies opened a combined total of 42 000 files or about 14 000 files per year, then in 2014 - after the Peel memo leak the societies increased their funding and opened a combined total of over 82 000 files after reopening 20 000 previously closed files as reported by the Toronto Star before complaining once again how underfunded and overworked they were.
 
Gene Colman, a Toronto family lawyer who handles cases involving CAS, said his office has been puzzled by the substantial increase in people calling because of CAS intervention in their families.
 
“I thought, ‘What’s going on, why are we getting so many calls?’ I wonder if it’s related. I don’t know,” he said not looking a gift horse in the mouth.
 
Don't look a gift horse in the mouth definition.
 
GONE theory put forward by a thinker named Jack Bologne where there are four reasons of fraud. "GONE" which stands for the first letter of each factor put forward, namely Greed, Opportunity, Need, and Exposure.


a.       Greed (avarice / greed) is the desire to always get the most. Greed is associated with an individual moral.


b.      Opportunity (opportunity / opportunities) is a situation that could come at any time. In addition, the chance is very dependent on a position of a person. The higher one's position, the greater the chances of fraud.


c.       Need (requirement) may be a contributing factor fraudulent activity when a person needs (it can be said) is very urgent. Demands for fulfillment is what then makes a person to take a shortcut to act fraudulently.


d.      Exposure (disclosure) in relation to penalties fraud perpetrators. With the unfolding of a fraud in the company did not rule out recurrence of the same thing if given a sentence or a witness who is weak and does not pose a deterrent properties.


Greed and Need is often referred to as the individual factors, while the opportunity and exposure is referred to as a generic or common factor.
 
A corrupt agency aided and abetted by a corrupt provincial court is a travesty of justice for Canadians an insult to the judicial system, to the Constitution of Canada, and to life, liberty, and justice for all.
 
It results in tyranny, oppression, and absolute despotism of the people. There is no greater criminal than the criminal that sits on the bench robbing children of their FAMILY HERITAGE.
 
C.A.S. ATTITUDE: WIN CHILD WELFARE CASES AT ALL COSTS.
 
When good men do nothing...
 
By Gene C. Colman of Gene C. Colman Family Law Centre posted in Child Welfare on Thursday, January 1, 2015.
 
It should not be a matter of "win" or "lose" when it comes to Ontario child welfare law. Ontario's Child and Family Services Act tells us that the paramount purpose is to "promote the best interests, protection and well being of children." One might note the glaring lack of any reference to family. In fact, there is a paucity of references to family throughout the entire CFSA even though many judges recognize the importance of maintaining family whenever possible.
 
I had a recent experience with CAS counsel at court when representing a family unjustly caught up in the system. Our office had prepared a very persuasive and comprehensive response to the Society's Application. We attended at the mandated five day hearing that follows apprehensions from parental care. The CAS certainly had not expected such forcefulness; normally parents are so overwhelmed at this early stage that they are unable to mount an effective defence. Generally, the court will rubber stamp the CAS requests. We did not agree to just stand idly by at the first appearance and CAS counsel was surprised by our aggressive (yet fair) approach.
 
Our written material seemed to have persuaded the judge. He instructed the lawyers to prepare a consent endorsement along the lines that we were seeking (which of course included an immediate return of the children to parental care). As we were returning to the courtroom after preparing the consent, the experienced and respected CAS counsel turned to me and my clients and remarked: "This is the third time your lawyer has beaten me."
 
The CAS counsel's comment was made innocently enough and indeed was intended to be complimentary. But still I was shocked (but probably should not have been). Why was I so shocked?
 
 
The Motherisk Commission details years of rights infringements by courts. "If the same problems were identified in criminal court, there would be a huge public outcry." Tammy Law.
 
Tammy Law's delusional thoughts, excuses, rationalizations and justifications for using the Motherisk test to justify denying parents due process and circumventing the Constitution, the Charter of Rights and the principles of fundamental Justice behind the closed doors of Ontario's family courts.
 
Posted on February 27, 2018 by tammylaw
 
After 2 years, and the review of more than 1200 cases, the Motherisk Commission came out with its report yesterday. The Report is required reading for everyone who has any role to play in child welfare – social workers, lawyers, courts, litigants. It describes a system that is dysfunctional, unfair, and undignified. In addition to its criticism of how CASs have handled drug addiction, the Commission details years of rights infringements by courts.
 
If the same problems were identified in criminal court, there would be a huge public outcry.
 
I want to be clear about what I think some of the fundamental problems are and how I think we can start to change this system. Because I am first and foremost a lawyer, my thoughts naturally focus on the role of lawyers in this mess. My thoughts are summarized as follows:
 
As lawyers, we need to recognize that good intentions are not enough. It is really easy to hide behind “the best interests of the child” and agree or acquiesce to all types of infringements of our clients’ basic human and Charter rights. This needs to stop. Lawyers need to start seeing their role in the context of defending our clients’ very real rights to human dignity and security of the person.
 
The culture of cooperation has gone too far. While I agree that it is very very important to work with the Children’s Aid Society to address their concerns, a line must be drawn when they demand cooperation that crosses the line. As a state agent, the Society has an obligation to ensure that it works in the most minimally intrusive way possible – respecting the client’s right to individual freedom while trying to ensure that its clients are served. This is a difficult job. Lawyers and courts should be there to ensure that the fine line is respected.
 
Society counsel need to understand that they have a public interest role. They should be providing advice to their clients in the context of being a public interest litigant. They have a duty to the court to be fair. This means that if unreliable evidence is being tendered (and there were many signs of this with respect to the Motherisk testing), they should be advising their clients about the unfairness of relying on it. Lawyers are and should be gatekeepers of evidence as much as courts are.
 
We need to be more vigilant. As noted in the report, our role as advocates is to raise every defence possible for our clients.
 
HOW ABOUT PRESENTING EVIDENCE THAT COUNTERS SWORN AFFIDAVITS WHEN CLIENTS HAVE IT IN ABUNDANCE... JUST SAYIN'..
 
Our clients are often extremely vulnerable, having lived lives that were challenged by multiple obstacles. Many have made admirable attempts to parent their children. We need to be fearless in our advocacy for them. As a lawyer, I have experienced and seen derisive, sarcastic, or rude comments directed at myself and other lawyers who attempt to defend their clients. This needs to stop. It’s our client’s right – their children’s right – that they have a full defence.
 
 
Does Ontario's CAS Show Signs of Intentional Confirmation Bias?
 
Confirmation bias, also called confirmatory bias or myside bias, is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms one's preexisting beliefs or hypotheses.
 
Although not a formal logical fallacy, confirmation bias is simply the tendency for individuals to favor information or data that support their beliefs. It is also the tendency for people to only seek out information that supports their a priori, or pre-existing, conclusions, and subsequently ignores evidence that might refute that pre-existing conclusion.
 
Technically, confirmation bias is a type of cognitive bias and a form of selection bias, which seeks data that confirm the hypothesis under study.
 
Avoiding confirmation bias is an important part of rationalism. The scientific method, itself, was developed to remove biases. In science, it is achieved by setting up problems so that you must find ways of disproving your hypothesis (falsifiability: A statement, hypothesis, or theory has falsifiability (or is falsifiable) if it can be proven false by contradicting it with a basic statement or observation.)
 
Chris Selley: Ontario's stolen children still getting a raw deal as province deals with Motherisk scandal.
 
UNACKNOWLEDGED BY ALL PARTIES..
 
There’s not much worse governments can do to people than take their children away, but the pure horror of it does not seem to have pervaded the public conscience.
 
Not one charity, church or person has come forward to offer any relief to the many victims traumatized by the treatment they received at the hands of their fellow Canadians citizens and no apologizes offered to anyone but gay couples waiting to adopt..
 
What is reprehensible is that while leading good lives (we assume) themselves and publicly abhorring those of wicked men, some, fearing to offend, shut their eyes to evil deeds instead of condemning them and not pointing out their malice. Saint Augustine.
 
 
 
If you have any practice questions or concerns related to the new CYFSA, please contact the Professional Practice Department at 416-972-9882 or 1-877-828-9380 or email practice@ocswssw.org.
 
Submission-re-Proposed-Regulations-under-the-CYFSA-January-25-2018. OCSWSSW May 1, 2018
 
ONTARIO HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION.
 
Under suspicion: Concerns about child welfare.
 
 
To file a human rights claim (called an application), contact the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario at:
 
If you need legal help, contact the Human Rights Legal Support Centre at:
Toll Free: 1-866-625-5179
TTY Toll Free: 1-866-612-8627
If you have any practice questions or concerns related to the new CYFSA, please contact the Professional Practice Department at 416-972-9882 or 1-877-828-9380 or email practice@ocswssw.org.



Submission-re-Proposed-Regulations-under-the-CYFSA-January-25-2018. OCSWSSW May 1, 2018



https://www.ocswssw.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/OCSWSSW-Submission-re-Proposed-Regulations-under-the-CYFSA-January-25-2018.pdf
 

About The Author

Advocates for family preservation against unwarranted intervention by government funded non profit agencies and is a growing union for families and other advocates speaking out against the children's aid society's... More

comments powered by Disqus