Indigenous Corrections Accountability Framework (ICAF) Annual Report 2020-2021
Land acknowledgement
We would like to respectfully acknowledge that the land on which we developed this report is in the traditional unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people. We invite all readers across Turtle Island to take a moment to acknowledge the land they live and move on. From coast to coast to coast, we acknowledge the ancestral and unceded territory of all the First Nations, Inuit, and Métis people who call this land home.
In addition, we encourage readers to reflect on the past, be mindful of how harmful dynamics may continue to be perpetuated to this day, and consider how we can each, in our own way, move forwards toward collective healing and true reconciliation.
Indigenous Initiatives Directorate,
on behalf of The Correctional Service of Canada
Senior Deputy Commissioner’s message
As Senior Deputy Commissioner, I am proud to present the 2020-2021 Indigenous Correctional Accountability Framework (ICAF). This report reviews areas of success, and opportunities to improve correctional outcomes and address the unique needs of Indigenous offenders through the Indigenous Continuum of Care. 2020-2021 marks the second year that an annual report on the performance results for Indigenous corrections within the Correctional Service of Canada (CSC) will be made publicly available. With the second year of external publication of the ICAF, CSC aims to demonstrate a transparent posture so that Canadians can have a better understanding of how CSC works to bring about transformative change in Indigenous corrections. Publication of the ICAF also provides a shared evidence base from which CSC can collaborate with partners and stakeholders on areas of shared concern.
The global COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on CSC operations, including the services, supports and interventions available to Indigenous offenders. In critical aspects, the pandemic has had a disproportionate impact on Indigenous offenders, exacerbating existing disparities and inequities faced by Indigenous, racialized and other equity-deserving communities in Canada.
These disparities provide a strong impetus to renew efforts to address endemic gaps between Indigenous and non-Indigenous offenders, by highlighting the need for CSC to confront and address an enduring legacy of colonialism and systemic racism. Both the Prime Minister and the Minister of Public Safety have outlined a clear mandate for CSC to address endemic gaps in service to Indigenous people throughout the federal correctional system.
CSC is aware that systemic racism and barriers contribute to the overrepresentation of Indigenous people in the criminal justice system, and is committed to accelerating work to improve outcomes for Indigenous offenders in meaningful ways. CSC has heard the call to all Public Service leaders to take meaningful action to advance anti-racism, equity and inclusion. In 2020-2021, the Executive Sub-committee on Indigenous Corrections, which I chair, made several key advancements to the provision of culturally appropriate program delivery, the release of Indigenous individuals to the community and in the recruitment and retention of Indigenous employees. The Executive Sub-Committee’s work serves to address systemic barriers, from the perspectives of both the clients we serve and the people who work with us, and will continue with renewed focus in years to come.
This past year, CSC’s dedicated staff worked tirelessly to ensure the safety of offenders and coworkers in light of the COVID-19 pandemic. They did so while continuing to deliver and enhance services, supports and interventions to Indigenous offenders. I look forward to supporting a doubling-down on our collective efforts in the coming year, so that Indigenous offenders may return home to make positive contributions to their communities.
Alain Toutsignant
SENIOR DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
Executive summary
In 2020-2021, there was a marked decline in a number of performance indicators measuring correctional outcomes for Indigenous offenders. Some pre-existing disparities in correctional outcomes between Indigenous and non-Indigenous offenders widened, pointing to a disproportionate impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Indigenous offenders.
The COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on CSC operations. In particular, modifications were made to core services in order to allow safe delivery in light of risks presented by the COVID19 pandemic. Group sizes for Correctional Programming were restricted and Elders were required to shift to a telework approach. Correlating interventions for Indigenous offenders were impacted, such as Elder’s services, Correctional Programming, and releases pursuant to Section 84 of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act (CCRA).
Despite the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, CSC demonstrated positive progress in key areas, including in the work of the Sub-Committee on Indigenous Corrections, Indigenous Interventions Centres, as well as Healing Lodges and Section 84 releases.
Since its inception in 2019, the EXCOM Sub-Committee on Indigenous Corrections has led the way on a number of policy and program delivery changes, including:
- The introduction of criteria for referral to lower-intensity programming, augmented with culturally responsive interventions
- Measures to increase access to culturally-restorative interventions (i.e. Indigenous Intervention Centres and Pathways)
- A streamlined s. 84 release process
- Changes to contracting approaches and rates of pay for Elders
- Indigenous representation objectives based on Indigenous offender representation and Workforce Availability
- Enhanced horizontal collaboration across Government of Canada departments and with Indigenous governing bodies and communities
Participation in CSC’s Indigenous Intervention Centre (IIC) model of interventions continued to produce positive results. The IIC model of interventions was designed to accelerate access to programming, conditional releases, transfers to Healing Lodges, and comprehensive section CCRA 84 release planning. Across all of these areas, Indigenous offenders participating in IIC interventions experienced more positive outcomes than non-participants. These results were achieved in spite of public health measures imposed to curb the spread of Covid-19 among inmate populations and staff, which negatively impacted the availability of services and support.
Performance indicators associated with healing lodges and Section 84 releases remained positive. A majority of offenders with CCRA Section 84 release plans acquired discretionary release at first release. Additionally, a majority of Indigenous offenders released from a Healing Lodge acquired a discretionary release, and most Indigenous offenders who reached their Sentence Expiry Date at a Healing Lodge completed their supervision successfully.
Commitments & drivers
The Government of Canada has prioritized efforts toward reconciliation through a renewed, nation-to-nation, government-to-government, and Inuit-Crown relationship based on recognition of rights, respect, co-operation, and partnership as the foundation for transformative change. CSC affirms commitments to advance meaningful reconciliation by addressing gaps in correctional results between Indigenous and non-Indigenous federally-sentenced persons.
The Truth and Reconciliation Commission
The Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) issued 94 Calls to Action urging all levels of government—federal, provincial, territorial and Indigenous—to work together to change policies and programs in a concerted effort to repair the harm caused by the Indian Residential School system and move forward with reconciliation. The Calls to Action specifically directed at CSC call for the elimination of barriers to the creation of additional Healing Lodges and for all levels of government to work with Indigenous communities to provide culturally relevant services to inmates on issues such as substance misuse, and family and domestic violence. CSC is using these Calls to Action as a guide to further address the gaps in correctional results between Indigenous and non-Indigenous federally-sentenced persons.
Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls
In June 2019, the final report of the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls (MMIWG) was published. The report, Reclaiming Power and Place, outlines the persistent and deliberate human and Indigenous rights violations and abuses that are the root cause behind Canada’s staggering rates of violence against Indigenous women, girls and gender-diverse people. Additionally, the report calls for “transformative legal and social changes to resolve the crisis that has devastated Indigenous communities across the country” and delivers 231 Calls for Justice, 12 of which are directed at CSC and four directed to all levels of government tied to corrections. CSC continues to address the Calls to Justice #157-167 & #169. These Calls for Justice guide CSC’s work towards enhancing correctional outcomes for Indigenous women and gender-diverse people.
United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (the Declaration) affirms and sets out a broad range of collective and individual rights that constitute the minimum standards to protect the rights of Indigenous peoples and to contribute to their survival, dignity and well-being. These include rights related to: self-determination and self-government; equality and non-discrimination; Indigenous institutions and legal systems, among others. The Declaration provides the Government of Canada with a road map to advance lasting reconciliation with Indigenous peoples.
In June 2021, Bill C-15 - An Act Respecting the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples received Royal Assent, reaffirming Canada’s commitment to Indigenous peoples and communities. Bill C-15 affirms the Declaration as a universal international human rights instrument with application in Canadian law, and provides a framework for the Government of Canada’s implementation of the Declaration.
Indigenous Justice Strategy
The Government of Canada has committed to develop an Indigenous Justice Strategy to address systemic discrimination and the overrepresentation of Indigenous people in the justice systems. The federal government will invest in research and data collection to better understand the role of different social systems in preventing involvement with the criminal justice system, the effectiveness of criminal justice processes in addressing overrepresentation, working with Indigenous people to develop research tools and methodologies to end systemic racism in the criminal justice system.
Senate Report on the Human Rights of Federally-Sentenced Persons
On June 16th 2021, the Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights tabled the Final Report on The Human Rights of Federally Sentenced Persons. The report found that human rights of people serving federal sentences are too often sacrificed in the name of security constraints and budgetary concerns. Focusing on equality rights, non-discrimination, and the improvement of services and supports offered to incarcerated individuals, the report cites 71 recommendations to safeguard human rights in federal prisons, including 18 that are specific to Indigenous corrections.
Overarching themes: 2020-2021
The Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic had profound affects across Canada in 2020-2021. Communities and individuals faced challenges as they adapted to evolving health, social, and economic complexities, and ongoing efforts to combat the spread of COVID-19. Vulnerable and disadvantaged groups across the country experienced particularly severe impacts which created new inequalities and exacerbated existing ones.
Throughout 2020-2021, CSC responded to the evolving threat of the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition to the establishment of a risk framework, which detailed safety measures in response to varying levels of pandemic risk and spread, CSC instituted measures to help combat the spread of COVID-19 within its institutions and facilities, including:
- Providing Personal Protective Equipment and testing for staff and offenders;
- Vaccination of staff and offenders;
- Remote program delivery and facilitation, where possible;
- Virtual counseling services for offenders;
- Increased release planning times for offenders scheduled to be released into the community; and
- Parole hearings via video teleconferences.
The measures taken to curb the spread of COVID-19 impacted correctional routines, interventions and services across institutions and communities. Correctional programs were sometimes postponed or prioritized based on the need to limit the spread of COVID-19 in institutions. Additionally, public health measures led to a lack of in-person interventions and programs, limited travel and weekend leave for offenders under community care and supervision, and reduced availability of services as service providers, including Elders, Chaplains, Counselors, and others were compelled to adapt to virtual platforms.
In line with broader patterns in Canada, the negative impacts from pandemic-related disruptions to institutional routines and correctional services fell disproportionately on historically disadvantaged groups in CSC's care, including the Indigenous offender population. Various important cultural and spiritual interventions were limited or shifted to virtual spaces. While Elders adapted the way they supported Indigenous offenders to provide services via videoconference and/or by telephone, the transition created delays for Indigenous offenders who relied on these services. Due to the centrality of cultural and spiritual supports in
Indigenous-specific interventions, such as IICs and Pathways, many Indigenous offenders faced increased challenges to complete their specific correctional programming.
Moreover, in order to limit the spread of COVID-19 within CSC facilities, certain programming and interventions were cancelled or delayed for short periods of time. These cancellations and delays disproportionately impacted Indigenous offenders, who tend to have greater educational, training, and employment needs than non-Indigenous offenders.
Additionally, many Indigenous communities faced serious challenges during the pandemic. As communities implemented measures to curb the spread of COVID-19, businesses, residential dwellings, and other services were impacted. This exacerbated the challenges Indigenous individuals faced in securing employment, furthering their education or vocational training, and meeting residency conditions upon release. The compound effects of pandemic disruptions on Indigenous communities made community corrections significantly more difficult, impacting correctional outcomes for many Indigenous offenders.
Over the last two years, the COVID-19 pandemic has accentuated gaps between Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations in CSC custody, and calls for systemic change to address ongoing gaps are louder and more pressing than ever before.
Reports such as The Final Report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, Reclaiming Power and Place: The Final Report of the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls, and the Senate report on the Human Rights of Federally-Sentenced Persons all draw clear connections between the over-representation of Indigenous people in federal correctional institutions and systemic racism in Canada. Policies such as the Indian Residential School system, the Pass System, and the Eskimo Identification System have contributed to the ongoing marginalization of many Indigenous people and communities in Canada.
Systemic racism is a form of racism that is embedded into the laws and regulations of a society or organization and can manifest in all aspects of human life, including criminal, justice, employment, housing, health care, education and child welfare. Additionally, systemic racism goes beyond laws and policies, as it reverberates into broader societal and intergenerational injustices. While policies and practices may appear neutral, the enforcement of them can have discriminatory impacts on racialized people. Furthermore, individuals, who work for these organizations, and who enforce (or not enforce) these policies, may have their own conscious or unconscious racial biases.
The interconnection of racism on an individual, institutional and societal level embeds racism into every level of a system or organization, making it difficult to identify, particularly for individuals who do not experience the consequences of this persistent discrimination. Due to the complex and all-encompassing nature of systemic racism, addressing it requires the upheaval of deeply rooted systems, which is often met with significant resistance and opposition from general society.
The compounding effects of historical and contemporary systemic racism and discrimination have resulted in an inter-generational legacy of poverty, homelessness, trauma, abuse, lower levels of education, and challenges with mental health and substance use among Indigenous populations. This legacy exists before an Indigenous person comes in contact with the Canadian criminal justice system and amplifies challenges once they do.
In order to meaningfully and sustainably address systemic racism, efforts must center around the voices and experiences of the marginalized and engage every level of an organization. CSC shares the responsibility with the rest of the criminal justice system in Canada to address the over-incarceration of Indigenous people. Commitments summarized in the Speech from the Throne (2021) and the most recent Mandate Letters to the Minister of Public Safety and the Commissioner of CSC prioritize working horizontally with public safety departments and other government departments to ensure a whole of government approach toward reconciliation. CSC will work to uphold these commitments by exploring initiatives and opportunities to strengthen horizontal collaboration.
The Calls to Action outlined in the TRC offer a clear path towards reconciliation, “repairing damaged trust by making apologies, providing individual and collective reparations, and following through with concrete actions that demonstrate real societal change” (Executive Summary, TRC). The core of meaningful societal change is relationship, and a commitment to ongoing healing and reflection. In this report, CSC seeks an honest and truthful examination of Indigenous corrections and plans to work along side Indigenous communities and organizations to address endemic gaps and bring about systemic change.
2020-2021 Results
Population profile
During the reporting period, the COVID-19 pandemic reduced the number of individuals under CSC’s jurisdiction. As waves of COVID-19 infections spread throughout Canada, the courts primarily suspended or scaled back operations, before resuming some services with restrictions. Additionally, the Canadian justice and correctional systems took a number of steps to reduce health risk in institutions. These steps included early releases of low-risk offenders, extended periods for parole hearings and alternatives to incarceration for those awaiting trials, sentencing and bail hearings. As well, offenders sentenced to federal sentences remained in provincial custody longer than normal. Provincial health restrictions required inmates to quarantine before receiving clearance to transfer to a federal site, and CSC’s health restrictions required newly arrived inmates to quarantine for 14 days. These measures restricted the flow of admissions from provincial to federal custody.
* According to the 2016 Census, Indigenous people represent 4.9% of the Canadian population. However, by the end of the
2020-2021 fiscal year, Indigenous people represented 27% of the overall population under CSC jurisdiction. Therefore, the Indigenous offender population remained significantly overrepresented in the federal correctional system.
Indigenous offender population percentage change from 2016-2017 to 2020-2021
Since 2016-2017, the percentage of Indigenous offenders relative to the overall population has increased in every region except the Quebec Region, as indicated in the graphic above. A larger percentage of Indigenous offenders tend to be housed in the Prairie Region, which houses the highest number of Indigenous offenders (n=2931) anywhere
in the country.
Indigenous women
The overrepresentation of Indigenous people under CSC jurisdiction is particularly evident among women, with the population of Indigenous women offenders having increased 14.3% since 2016-2017. At the end of 2020-2021,
Indigenous women represented 36% of all women under CSC jurisdiction. This over-representation is even more pronounced for the in-custody population, as Indigenous women made up 43% of the total population of women
in custody at year-end 2020-2021.
10-year trend: warrants of committal and offenders in custody
The above graphic illustrates the continued increase in the number and percentage of Indigenous offenders in CSC institutions over a 10-year period.
Warrants of Committal (WOC) provide the legal authority for the administration of an offender’s sentence. The rate of WOC outlines the rate at which offenders enter CSC’s custody. For Indigenous offenders, the in-custody population percentage has been consistently higher than
WOC rates for the past seven years. The data suggest that increasing percentages of Indigenous offenders are admitted to federal custody, and that Indigenous offenders stay in custody at higher rates than they are admitted, resulting in an increasing population of Indigenous offenders in custody. These rates are compared to the non-Indigenous offender population, which is experiencing the inverse effect, with the non-Indigenous offenders’ incustody rate decreasing faster than their WOC rate. The result of this effect is a decrease of non-Indigenous offenders in CSC custody.
While CSC does not control the imposition of federal sentences (or offenders admitted on WOC), CSC can influence the time offenders spend incarcerated and their likelihood to reoffend by providing timely access to effective rehabilitation and promoting conditions favorable to successful reintegration. Providing effective and culturally appropriate rehabilitation and reintegration supports and services for Indigenous offenders is an enduring priority for CSC.
Offender population profile
When compared to non-indigenous offenders, Indigenous offenders tend to:
As indicated by the graphic above, the Indigenous offender population differs markedly from the non-Indigenous population in a number of areas. Indigenous offenders tend to be younger, have higher education needs, higher OSL and CRI ratings, and a higher dynamic need level compared to non-Indigenous offenders. Indigenous offenders also tend to serve shorter sentences than non-Indigenous offenders.
Differences also exist in criminogenic profiles between First Nations, Métis and Inuit federally sentenced persons. These patterns pose challenges to ensuring alignment between policy initiatives, decision-making regarding correctional interventions, and the criminogenic profiles and unique needs of different Indigenous offender groups. Although Indigenous offenders are often examined as one sub-population, First Nations, Métis and Inuit offenders have distinct traditions, cultures and world views. CSC research underscores that they have unique characteristics that need to be understood and taken into account by decision- and policy-makers.
Admission & assessment
Following admission to CSC care, offenders undergo an intake assessment process. This process is utilized to gather vital information about an offender, which will help determine several aspects of their sentence – such as security level, overall needs, and more. In the case of Indigenous offenders, the assessment process presents opportunities for CSC to gather and consider relevant information that is applicable to Indigenous-specific services, supports, interventions and programs. These services include the support of Elders and Spiritual Advisors, Indigenous Liaison Officers, access to cultural and spiritual programs, the Indigenous Continuum of Care, Healing Lodges, care at a section 81 facility, and releases pursuant to section 84 the CCRA. Additionally, during the assessment stage for Indigenous offenders, the collection and consideration of Indigenous Social History (ISH) factors begins.
Over the reporting period, Indigenous people represented more than 30% of all offenders admitted to CSC on WOC. Overall admissions remained relatively stable in the last five (5) years, with the total number of individuals admitted on WOC, both Indigenous and nonIndigenous, slightly decreasing in recent years.
Offenders admitted on warrant of committal since 2016-2017
Over the past five years, Indigenous people have represented an increasing percentage of offenders admitted to CSC on WOC.
First offender security level (OSL) on offender’s sentence
Indigenous offenders continue to receive first OSL assessments of Medium and Maximum at higher rates than non-Indigenous offenders. In 2020-2021, 16% of Indigenous offenders were assessed with a Minimum OSL, compared to 34% of non-Indigenous offenders.
Conversely, 73% of Indigenous offenders were assessed with a Medium OSL in 2020-2021, compared to 59% of
non-Indigenous offenders, while 11% of Indigenous offenders were assessed with a Maximum OSL this year, compared to 7% of non-Indigenous offenders.
Indigenous women
The increasing over-representation of Indigenous offenders in admissions on WOC is particularly pronounced among women. In 2020-2021, Indigenous women represented 37.6% of admissions on WOC, an increase from 32.4% in
2016-2017. This compares to 62.4% of admission for non-Indigenous women in 2020-2021, which is down from 67.6%
in 2016-2017.
To learn more about Indigenous Social History refer to the 2019-2020 ICAF (page 18)
Offenders with a minimum CRS recommendations who received a higher OSL decision
Over the past five years, Indigenous offenders continued to be assessed with higher OSL than their initial CRS, when compared to non-Indigenous offenders.
For this indicator, the gap between the two populations has been widening since 2016-2017.
As per section 79.1(2) of the CCRA, an Indigenous offender’s ISH factors are not to be taken into consideration for decisions respecting the assessment of the risk posed by an Indigenous offender unless those factors could decrease the level of risk. An understanding of ISH allows CSC employees to better address an offender’s needs, thus increasing their reintegration potential and enhancing opportunities for healing.
Percentage of offenders experiencing a change in security environment from their initial security level
In 2020-2021, Indigenous offenders experienced changes in security classification at similar rates
as non-Indigenous offenders.
Correctional interventions
CSC uses a unique approach for Indigenous corrections called the Indigenous Continuum of Care. The Indigenous Continuum of Care model provides culturally responsive approaches to address the needs of Indigenous offenders, taking into account Indigenous culture, identity, and social history. The interventions discussed in this section include Correctional Programs and Education, Pathways, Healing Lodges, Section 84 releases, and transfers of offenders to the care and custody of Indigenous governing bodies pursuant to Section 81 of the CCRA.
During the reporting period, pandemic-related restrictions impacted offender interventions. Restrictions were placed on offender movement, gathering sizes, and staff numbers in institutions to reduce the spread of COVID-19. CSC staff adopted new work practices to continue providing correctional interventions, irrespectively of the fact that CSC’s services were heavily affected by the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020-2021.
Number of enrolments in correctional programs: indigenous specific vs. non-indigenous specific
Over the past five years, Indigenous offenders have enrolled in Indigenous-specific programs at an increasing rate, while Indigenous enrollments in non-Indigenous specific programs have decreased - a development which demonstrates Indigenous offenders accessing culturally responsive interventions.
Percentage of offenders with an identified need who complete a correctional program prior to full
parole eligibility date
The percentage of Indigenous offenders with an identified need who completed a correctional program decreased in 2019-2020 and 2020-2021. A gap in results between Indigenous and non-Indigenous offenders has persisted over the past five years.
Offenders with a correctional intervention board - accepted referral to educational upgrading within
120 days following admission out of all offenders with an identified education need
Referrals for educational upgrading after admission are higher for Indigenous offenders than non-Indigenous offenders.
Percentage of offenders with an identified educational need who have upgraded their education prior
to full parole eligibility date
Over the past five years, Indigenous people have achieved percentages equal to or higher than non-Indigenous offenders in the area of educational upgrades prior to Full Parole Eligibility Date (FPED).
Median days from admission to first enrolment in a readiness nationally recognized correctional program
Over the past five years, the median days from admission to first enrolment in a Nationally Recognized Correctional Program have risen. The increase has been more pronounced for Indigenous offenders.
Median days from admission to start of first nationally recognized correctional program
Over the past five years, the median days from admission to start of first Nationally Recognized Correctional Program (NRCP) have risen. The increase has been more pronounced for Indigenous offenders.
The above graphic illustrates that over the past five years, Indigenous offenders have consistently received Serious Institutional Charges at nearly twice the rate of non-Indigenous offenders.
Pathways
To learn more about the Pathways model, refer to the 2019-2020 ICAF (page 34).
Pathways initiatives help prepare inmates for transfers to lower security and conditional release, which contributes to the successful continuation of their healing journey into the community.
Indigenous offenders who participate in Pathways achieve a higher percentage of discretionary releases, as well as higher percentages of transfers to a lower security level before release, compared to Indigenous offenders who do not participate in Pathways. In 2020-2021, 52% of offenders released from a Pathways unit were released on discretionary release, compared to 34% of Indigenous offenders who did not participate in Pathways. Additionally, 55% of Pathways participants were released from a minimum-security environment, compared to 29% of Indigenous non-participants.
The EXCOM Sub-Committee on Indigenous Corrections has identified Pathways initiatives as one of its focus priorities. In 2020-2021, the Pathways model and admission criteria were revised to expand access to Pathways at Medium-security sites, and consultation with the Regional Deputy Commissioners took place to ensure implementation of the revised Pathways model. Additionally, the EXCOM Sub-Committee on Indigenous Corrections reviewed the extent to which enhanced focus on maximization of Pathways bed utlilization, in conjunction with measures to increase participation in the IIC model and transfers to healing lodges, could create a misconception that Indigenous offenders are expected to complete all three interventions prior to being eligible for release, thereby potentially delaying their eventual release. Regional consultations revealed a need to clarify that institutional staff are to consider IICs, Pathways and healing lodges as complementary alternatives designed to lessen the over-securitization of Indigenous offenders and to accelerate their release, and that these interventions should not be seen as sequential or interdependent. The Sub-committee’s plan for fiscal year 2021-2022 includes further discussions on the need to revise, regionally adapt and/or clarify the role of IICs within the overall model for Indigenous corrections, thereby mitigating unintended pressures on other culturally specific accommodations.
Pathways departures
In 2020-2021, there were a total of 370 departures from Pathways, of which 47% were successful. Successful departures include all offenders who depart from a Pathways unit due to day parole, full parole, successful transfer to a Healing Lodge or successful transfer to lower security. The 2020-2021 results represent a decrease from the previous fiscal year, which saw a success rate of 53% .
Of the Indigenous paritipants who successfully departed from a Pathways unit in 2020-2021:
- 47.4% received either day or full parole;
- 52.6% were transferred to lower security or to a Healing Lodge.
The operation of Pathways was significantly impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Pathways Pathways are designed to be Elder-driven, healing-intensive interventions involving offenders who are committed to developing responsible behaviors. However, with COVID-19 outbreaks in institutions, Pathways units were repurposed as quarantine units in order to prevent the spread of infection among the offender population. As a result, offenders were housed in Pathways units who were not participating in Pathways interventions and did not demonstrate the same levels of commitment to responsible behaviour. Additionally, Elders and Indigenous Liaison Officers often faced limitations in entering units due to health restrictions. As a result, Pathways units did not operate to their full potential in 2020-2021, which may have contributed to fewer departures and a lower success rate for the fiscal year.
Section 84 release planning
To learn more about Section 84 release planning, refer to the 2019-2020 ICAF (page 23).
In 2020-2021, 6.1% of Indigenous offenders in custody were released pursuant to Section 84 of the CCRA. The numbers of Indigenous individuals who are informed of and interested in Section 84 of the CCRA remained low, compared to the overall Indigenous population at CSC.
Offenders who are released to a Section 84 location tend to achieve better release results than Indigenous offenders not released on a Section 84 release.
In 2020-2021, 67% of Indigenous offenders on a Section 84 release received a discretionary release, as opposed to 32% of Indigenous offenders who were not involved in the Section 84 release process, a trend that has been consistent over the past five years. Additionally, Indigenous offenders with a Section 84 release plan complete their supervision at higher rates than those without a Section 84 release plan. Yet, only 18.5% of Indigenous offenders interested in a Section 84 release were released to a Section 84 location in 2020-2021. Moreover, 22% of Indigenous offenders with a Section 84 release plan did not receive a Section 84 release.
Although not all Indigenous offenders will seek a Section 84 release, the successful results from those who do signal the need to focus on expanding the effective use of Section 84 of the CCRA to its full legislative intent in coming years.
A number of factors inhibited the full and effective use of the Section 84 release process and contributed to lower than expected utilization in 2020-2021. Inefficiencies in tools and processes, such as limitations on the ability to accurately document an offenders interest in the Section 84 release process, as well as gaps in staff training, and resistance to participating in the Section 84 process on the part of offenders and/or implicated Indigenous communities may have contributed to lower participation rates in 2020-2021. Some Indigenous partners chose to restrict access to their communities in an effort to control the spread of COVID-19. This may have also contributed to the lower
participation rates.
The EXCOM Sub-Committee on Indigenous Corrections has identified expanding the use of the Section 84 release process as one of its focus priorities. In 2020-2021, a working group was convened to review internal processes to streamline Section 84 release planning in order to enhance participation. Additionally, memoranda were issued to all Regions to reinforce the need to reconfirm interest in the Section 84 process at intake, and to deactivate interest flags within an offender’s profile, where applicable. These memoranda helped to address the issue of false positive identification of interest in Section 84, thereby enhancing the integrity of performance data related to the Section 84 release process.
The number of Indigenous individuals transferred to a Healing Lodge in 2020-2021 was low, compared to those informed of and interested in transferring to a Section 81 facility over the same time frame. Specifically, there were 135 successful transfers to CSC-run Healing Lodges and 50 to Section 81 Healing Lodges.
Correctional results suggest that Healing Lodges contribute to improved release outcomes for Indigenous offenders. 70.1% of all Indigenous offenders with a minimum OSL released from a Healing Lodge acquired discretionary release. 87% of Indigenous offenders with a minimum OSL who reached SED and were released from a Healing Lodge completed their supervision successfully. Therefore, current low utilization rates demonstrate significant opportunity costs as only a fraction of those eligible ultimately benefit from the targeted, culturally restorative interventions offered at Healing Lodges.
Low utilization rates can be partially attributable to the fact that all Section 81 Healing Lodges are located in the Prairie and Quebec Regions, leaving all other Regions underserviced. In those Regions that have Healing Lodge capacity, existing bed spaces were under-utilized. Additionally, there continued to be a lack of parity in the way programming offered by Section 81 partners is perceived, in comparison to research-validated CSC programming, as well as a general lack of timely access to programming.
In order to expand access to Healing Lodges in underserviced Regions, CSC continued to work with Indigenous communities who expressed interest in establishing a Section 81 Healing Lodge, and reviewed statements of interest from Indigenous communities from coast to coast to coast. To address underutilization of Healing Lodge capacity in Regions that were adequately serviced, CSC improved processes which cascade offenders to lower security levels, thereby increasing the pool of eligible candidates to transfer to Section 81 facilities. Additionally, CSC initiated efforts to develop options to address the lack of parity between CSC programs and interventions offered by Section 81 partners.
Reintegration
CSC remains focused on addressing long-standing differential release outcomes for Indigenous offenders. Improving discretionary release and successful supervision results in meaningful ways contributes to addressing the over-incarceration of Indigenous federally-sentenced persons. Additionally, reintegration results speak to the effectiveness of correctional programs and interventions in the healing and rehabilitation of offenders and their safe reintegration into the community.
Reintegration is a joint process between CSC and the Parole Board of Canada (PBC), with both agencies seeking to assist offenders as they transition from incarceration and return safely to their communities. CSC offers offenders correctional programing and interventions to better facilitate this transition and assist in the planning for their release. When an offender is reviewed for conditional release, CSC assesses the suitability of the offender for release and provides the information and a recommendation to the PBC. Assessment considerations include the offender’s risk to reoffend and the extent to which that risk can be safely managed in the community. The decision whether or not to grant parole and conditions of release is determined by the PBC. Under the CCRA, offenders have the right to appear before the PBC on the date they are eligible for parole. Offenders may waive or postpone their consideration for parole for any of number of reasons, including non-completion of correctional programming. As part of the decision-making process, PBC considers a range of factors, including social and criminal history, progress made in custody, victim statements, offenders’ release plans, and community supports.
In order to provide a responsive hearing process for Indigenous offenders, Elder-assisted and Community-assisted hearings are available. To learn more about Elder- and Community- assisted parole hearings, refer to the 2019-2020 ICAF (page 37).
Percentage of offenders who withdrew their day parole hearings
Percentage of offenders who waived their full parole hearings
For the last five years, the percentage of Indigenous offenders who withdrew their day parole hearings has decreased. A similar trend is observable in the percentage of offenders who waived their full parole hearing over the last five years.
Offenders may choose to withdraw or waive parole hearings if they feel they are not prepared or ready for a parole hearing. Many factors contribute to the decision to withdraw or waive a parole hearing, including incomplete programming, lack of support from the offender’s Parole Officer, recent charges incurred in the institution, or to avoid a negative decision. The gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous offenders could also be explained by higher security classifications, institutionalisation and language barriers, particularly for Inuit offenders.
Discretionary release, including day parole and full parole, are the most favourable release types for all offenders. They allow an offender to engage and participate in community-based activities before their Statutory Release and Warrant Expiry Date, preparing them for their eventual release from CSC supervision. The prioritization of parole early in an offender’s sentence facilitates a gradual return to the community, increasing the likelihood of success upon release.
A waiver is a written declaration given voluntarily by an offender that explicitly relinquishes the offender's legal right to a hearing and/or a review by the National Parole Board.
A withdrawal is a voluntary request from an offender advising the National Parole Board that he or she no longer wishes to be reviewed for a day or full parole review as indicated by his or her earlier application.
Percentage of offenders who aquired a discretionary release at the time of first release since 2016-2017
A persistent gap of approximately 20% remained in the rate of discretionary release at the time of first release between Indigenous and non-Indigenous offenders every year over the last five years.
Percentage of offenders incarcerated past statutory release date
As per section 127 of the CCRA, offenders may receive a statutory release and subsequent community supervision after serving
two-thirds of a fixed-length sentence. However, offenders who have received life or indeterminate sentences are not eligible for
statutory release.
Additionally, pursuant to s.130(3) of the CCRA, the PBC may order an offender to be detained beyond their statutory release date if there are reasonable grounds to believe that the offender is likely to commit:
- An offence causing serious harm or death,
- A sexual offence involving a child, or
- A serious drug offence.
First release by release type
An offender’s statutory release can be revoked if a condition of their release has been breached.
Employment plays an important role in successful reintegration. CSC research indicates that Indigenous offenders are more likely to be unemployed on admission and have lower levels of education than non-Indigenous offenders. CSC research also supports the notion that maintenance of a community job, at any skill level, is related to a reduced likelihood of recidivism, highlighting the importance of employment in successful reintegration.
Prior to 2020-2021, the percentage of employment intervention referrals actioned within 120 days of admission for Indigenous and non-Indigenous offenders were comparable. In 2020-2021, for the first time since 2016-2017, an observable gap existed between the two groups.
Percentage of employment intervention referrals actioned within 120 days of admission to federal custody
Percentage of offenders with an identified employment need who have received vocational training or certification prior to first release
Percentage of offenders with an identified need for employment in the community, the percentage who secure such employment prior to sentence expiry date
Percentage of time spent employed, for offenders under community supervision
The COVID-19 pandemic, and public health measures designed to curb the spread of infection, impacted businesses across the country, as these faced closure and capacity limitations. These impacts undoubtedly affected offenders’ abilities to find and maintain employment in the community in 2020-2021, leading to a decrease in the number of offenders with an identified need for community employment securing employment upon release.
Corcan Indigenous Offender Employment Initiative (IEOI)
CORCAN’s IEOI continued to be implemented in the Prairie, Ontario and Pacific Regions, building on successes since launching in 2017. The IOEI enhances on-the-job and vocational training, apprenticeships related to employment in construction and manufacturing. The IOEI also provides transitional employment and enhances support services to assist offenders in securing and maintaining employment in the community.
In November 2020, the Nekaneet First Nation was gifted a house that was built by the residents of the Okimaw Ohci Healing Lodge (OOHL) for female offenders. Residents of OOHL learned every aspect of building a house, including how to read blueprints, how to frame exterior and interior walls, and interior finishing. The skills and training residents acquired through the IEOI allowed them to build employment skills and confidence to aid their reintegration to the community.
Supervision
Offenders can be granted various types of conditional release from an institution to the community during their sentence, including temporary absences, day parole, full parole, or statutory release. When the PBC grants a release to an offender, there are a number of conditions that can be set, in addition to the standard release conditions. Offenders remain supervised by CSC and are required to uphold standard, special, and/or residency conditions, as applicable. While the standard conditions are the same for each offender, special and residency conditions are specific to both the individual and place of residency within the community.
If an offender breaches their release conditions while in the community, their conditional release may be suspended, resulting in a return to a CSC institution. Offenders may also return to a CSC institution if they were charged with and/or convicted of another offense while on supervised release.
CSC research shows that offenders granted day or full parole have lower rates of reoffending before Sentence Expiry Date (SED) than those released at statutory release. Research also indicates that most offenders who are assessed as having a low risk of reoffending are more likely to be successfully supervised in the community, with a lower likelihood of reoffending before the end of their sentence.
Percentage of offenders who reached their sentence expiry date without experiencing a revocation,
charge and/or conviction while on supervision
The rate of Indigenous offenders reaching SED without revocation, charge, or conviction when supervised increased over the past five years. However, a persistent gap remained between Indigenous and non-Indigenous offenders.
The EXCOM Sub-Committee on Indigenous Corrections has identified Suspensions and Revocations as one of its priority areas of focus. In 2020-2021, a working group was convened to assist in developing short- and long-term strategies to improve suspension and revocation rates for Indigenous offenders. Additionally, the Sub-Committee conducted qualitative and quantitative reviews of gaps between Indigenous and non-Indigenous women offenders in suspension and revocation rates. CSC also collaborated with the PBC on efforts to improve suspension and revocation rates for Indigenous offenders.
Percentage of offenders who reached their sentence expiry date without experiencing a revocation, charge and/or conviction while on supervision (offenders on section 84 release and offenders without
a section 84 release)
Indigenous offenders with a Section 84 release reached their Sentence Expiry Date on supervised release without revocation at higher rates than Indigenous offenders without a Section 84 release.
Rate of convictions on supervision for minor/moderate offences per 1,000
Rate of convictions on supervision for serious or violent offences, per 1,000 offenders
The rate of conviction on supervision for minor/moderate offences per 1,000 remained higher for Indigenous offenders, when compared to non-Indigenous offenders. Minor and moderate convictions on supervision include any offence listed in Schedule II of the CCRA or any nonschedule offence. However, both population groups saw a decrease in the rate of minor and moderate convictions over the past five years, with the non-Indigenous group decreasing 30% and the Indigenous population group decreasing 23% since 2016-2017.
Serious convictions on supervision include any offence listed in Schedule I of the CCRA. Indigenous offenders incurred a higher rate of serious convictions than non-Indigenous offenders. Both groups saw a decrease in conviction rates over the past five years, with the Indigenous group seeing a 36% decrease since 2016-2017, compared to a 33% decrease for the non-Indigenous group.
Regional approaches to supervision
In order to address the persistent gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous offenders in s upervision results, CSC surveyed best practices across regions. In the Atlantic Region, Indigenous Suspension Review Boards were used to incorporate Indigenous perspectives to the suspension process, helping to implement mitigation measures prior to full supervision suspension, while also helping to increase operational knowledge and competency surrounding the application of Indigenous Social History. In the Ontario Region, work was done to improve supervision services for Indigenous offenders in rural locations, with the Region looking to develop Memoranda of Understanding with provincial entities to increase release support services. Similarly, in the Quebec Region, supervision staff made several visits a year to remote locations to ensure face-to-face and in-person meetings could be held with offenders under supervision. In the Prairie Region, Indigenous post-suspension review boards were established to ensure that all Indigenous suspensions were considered in a culturally relevant manner. Finally, the Pacific Region instituted specialized Indigenous teams to facilitate supervision, collaboration, early intervention, and the sharing of information or resources on Indigenous issues, along with Indigenous Supervision Teams who supervise the vast majority of Indigenous cases. Bringing to bear regional best practices, CSC worked to implement an array of initiatives to better serve Indigenous offenders while they are on supervised release in the community.
Percentage of offenders who were not re-admitted to federal custody on a new sentence within
five (5) years following sentence expiry date
The percentage of offenders who were not re-admitted to federal custody on a new sentence within five years following Sentence Expiry Date has improved slightly but steadily since 2016-2017. However, the gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous offenders remains.
The COVID-19 pandemic had a substantial impact on offenders under supervision in 2020-2021. The various measures to help curb the spread of infection increased the challenges offenders faced in accessing accommodations, training, services, and employment in the community, as many businesses and organizations were impacted by capacity limitations and intermittent closures throughout the year. These challenges negatively impacted offenders’ abilities to adhere to supervision conditions, many of which relate to employment and residency. Remote Indigenous communities tended to be disproportionately impacted by pandemic-related restrictions.
As reflected in the Indigenous Offender profile Indigenous offenders tend to have higher needs, be classified as higher risk, and be admitted for violent offences when compared to non-Indigenous offenders. These factors present added challenges for community supervision, with more conditions and supports required upon release. These offender profile aspects, in combination with the substantial impact from COVID-19, combined to compound the challenges Indigenous offenders faced under supervision in 2020-2021. As Indigenous offenders continue to face higher rates of minor/moderate and serious/violent charges, convictions, and revocations while on supervision than non-Indigenous offenders, the gap between these two groups for re-admission to federal custody will remain. Successful supervision is vital in ensuring offenders are not readmitted to CSC’s custody following their release.
The National Indigenous Plan
The National Indigenous Plan is part of CSC’s commitment to focusing collective attention on Indigenous Corrections, with particular emphasis on proactive, informed and engaged case management to improve reintegration results for Indigenous offenders.
To learn more about the National Indigenous Plan and IIC’s, refer to the 2019 ICAF (page 48).
Throughout fiscal year 2020, the EXCOM Subcommittee on Indigenous Corrections assessed and discussed measures to improve the IIC model of interventions in an effort to enhance correctional outcomes for Indigenous lower than expected participation rates of Indigenous offenders in IICs were analyzed to identify potential barriers. In consultation with officials at various levels of the organization, IIC eligibility criteria were identified as a barrier to participation In order to expand access to the IIC model of interventions for segment of the Indigenous population, the Subcommittee recommended the removal of the restriction on sex offences, thereby amending the IIC eligibility criteria to include Indigenous offenders requiring moderate sex offender programming. The recommendation received approval CSC’s Executive Committee, and an announcement and bulletin on the amended IIC criteria were communicated to all staff in January 2021.
As illustrated by the indicators below, the IIC model continue to produce positive results. Overall, the 2020-2021 program indicators that Indigenous offenders at an IIC tended to achieve better results compared to the overall Indigenous population at CSC.
In this section, Key Performance Indicator (KPI) illustrate the results for the performance indicators outlined in the National Indigenous Plan. Specifically, each KPI card provides the result for IIC participants compared to the overall Indigenous population for the 2020-2021 Fiscal Year. Additional, a line graph is provided which represents the five-year trend.
Since 2017-2018, the percentage of successful transfers to healing lodges steadily increased. In 2020-2021, 95.9% of transfers to healing lodges were successful, representing a four year high. The continued success reflected in this indicator over the past four years validates the importance and effectiveness of Healing Lodges, as unique,
culturally-grounded, and Elder-driven rehabilitative environments distinct from mainstream institutions, in the reintegration of Indigenous offenders. Positive trends highlighted through this indicator are consistent with the existing body of literature, as well as recently developed internal research, which underlines the distinctive, culturally specific aspects of Healing Lodges that, collectively, help guide residents through their healing journeys and support gradual, safe reintegration.
The percentage of successful transfers to healing lodges remained high over the past four years. However, the overall number of transfers to a healing lodge remains relatively low.
The percentage of institutional random-sample urinalysis positives for Indigenous offenders decreased by 1.6% from 2019-2020 to 2020-2021. Despite the slight decrease, this indicator increased 6.9% since 2017-2018. Similarly, since 2017-2018, percentage of random-sample refusals for Indigenous offenders trended up year-over-year. The percentage of random-sample refusals for Indigenous offenders in 2020-2021 represented a four-year high.
The history of colonization continues to impact Indigenous communities and individuals through intergenerational trauma, systemic discrimination and socio-economic marginalization. Social determinants of health, a broad range of economic, personal, and social factors, likely contribute to problematic substance use for Indigenous individuals in CSC care. The trends reflected in the indicators in question, i.e. increasing rates of problematic substance use, mirrored societal challenges in the community, where rates of problematic substance use continued to rise. During the 2020-2021 fiscal year, problematic substance use was exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, which disrupted individuals’ regular routines, limited the availability of programs, limited (in-person) interactions with Elders, and temporarily suspended visits. These disruptions lessened the cultural and social supports that help individuals mitigate problematic substance use. The impacts thereof are reflected in the results.
In 2020-2021, CSC continued its efforts to increase education and awareness related to problematic substance use. Information about substance use and Opioid Agonist Therapy (OAT) was incorporated into Elder orientation to emphasize the impacts of validated treatments of problematic substance use. Additionally, a CSC-wide campaign to reduce the stigma surrounding OAT and substance use was developed. As an organization, CSC worked towards aligning its National Drug Strategy with the Canadian Drugs and Substances Strategy, which is centralized around the four pillars of: Prevention, Treatment, Harm Reduction, and Enforcement.
Over the last five years, the percentage of Indigenous offenders with an established Section 84 release plan prior to first release has been steadily decreasing. However, it is worth noting that the percentage of offenders granted a discretionary release is notably higher for IIC participants. A lower than anticipated level of interest in Section 84 releases on the part of offenders and a lack of support from communities may have contributed to the declining results for this indicator. Specifically, in 2020-2021, the COVID-19 pandemic likely exacerbated the downward trend, as some Indigenous governing bodies restricted access to their communities in an effort to control the spread of COVID-19. CSC continued to engage with Indigenous communities as self-determining partners, respecting those communities that imposed lockdown measures. To better understand and address the declining trend since 2017-2018, the EXCOM Sub-committee on Indigenous Corrections identified Section 84 releases as an area of priority. For insight into possible drivers and contributing factors, the Sub-committed consulted with national and regional staff. Feedback was consistent across Regions, with those consulted advising on the need to streamline the Section 84 release process and to address false positive identification of interest in the Section 84 process. As such, the Sub-Committee convened an inter-disciplinary working group to explore opportunities to streamline the Section 84 administrative process and potential policy implications.
The rate of supervision suspensions decreased over the past five years. However, the rate of supervision suspensions remained relatively high. On this matter, a presentation of the Sub-committee’s work was delivered to the PBC Interlinkages in November 2020, to identify opportunities to collaborate on areas of shared interest, including, but not limited to the improvement of suspension and revocation rates for Indigenous offenders. During the meeting, the PBC committed to reviewing its internal policy framework for systemic barriers to enhanced release and reintegration outcomes for Indigenous offenders.
Indigenous Women Offenders
Across a majority of correctional performance indicators, such as those related to interventions, supervision, and reintegration, Indigenous women offenders tended to suffer adverse differential outcomes, when compared to non-Indigenous women offenders. Gaps between Indigenous and non-Indigenous women offenders remained relatively stable over the past five years. Encouragingly, however, Indigenous Women offenders participating in the IIC model of interventions tended to achieve more positive results than non-participants
Overall, the Indigenous women offender population increased by 69 individuals, or 14.3%, in the past five years, with Indigenous women now representing 36% of all women under CSC jurisdiction. However, the bulk of this increase stemmed from an increase among the incommunity population. Since 2016-2017, the Indigenous women population on release in the community increased by 55 individuals (162 to 217), or 25.3%, while the in-custody Indigenous women population rose by 14 individuals (253 to 267), or 5.5%. In all, the increase to the incommunity population represented 79.7% of the total population increase for Indigenous women over the past five years. Said changes in demographics are suggestive of early indications that strategies instituted to ensure Indigenous offenders had adequate access to community release at first eligibility were delivering results.
The overrepresentation of Indigenous women under CSC jurisdiction was particularly pronounced when looking at the in-custody population. In 2020-2021, Indigenous women represented 43% of all women in custody at CSC, a five percentage point increase from 2016-2017. Comparatively, the non-Indigenous women offender population, which represented 57% of the overall women offender population in custody, decreased five percentage points from five years ago.
The EXCOM Sub-Committee on Indigenous Corrections identified the need to address differential outcomes for women serving federal sentences as one of its areas of strategic focus. In 2020-2021, in order to identify trends and set targets for interventions, quantitative and qualitative reviews were conducted to analyze conditional release suspension and revocation rates, time to start of first NRCP, and the adequacy of program delivery approaches for women. These reviews will be utilized by the Sub-Committee to enhance outcomes for Indigenous women offenders.
Indigenous women offender population percentage change from 2016-2017 to 2020-2021
Across all Regions, except for the Quebec Region, the Indigenous women offender population increased
from 2016-2017 to 2020-2021.
Women offenders in-custody at CSC
Across all Regions, except for the Quebec Region, the Indigenous women offender population increased
from 2016-2017 to 2020-2021.
Women offenders admitted on WOC
The percentage Indigenous women admitted to CSC on WOC increased over the past five years, while the percentage of non-Indigenous women admitted to CSC on WOC decreased.
Women offenders – Inital offender security level distribution
Indigenous women offenders were more likely to have an initial security classification of Medium or Maximum, when compared with non-Indigenous women offenders, who were more likely to have an initial classification of classified as Minimum security.
Median days from admission to start of first institutional main nationally recognized correctional program
Since 2016-2017, increases in wait times to start correctional programs occurred for both Indigenous and non-Indigenous women offenders. However, the increase was more pronounced for Indigenous women, creating a widening gap over the past five years.
In 2020-2021, a review was undertaken to assess why Indigenous women offenders were waiting longer to start their first institutional NRCP. Information gathered identified the following:
- Indigenous women were over-represented in Maximum security (Secure Unit) and, therefore, had more limited access to NRCPs;
- Challenges with the resources required to deliver programs, including infrastructure;
- Offender mental health concerns might influence access to programs and/or impact an offender’s degree of responsivity;
- Issues with Elder availability and required levels of Elder participation;
- High turn-over rates among Correctional Program Officers (CPO) and Indigenous Correctional Program Officers (ICPO);
- Inter-regional transfers could cause delays in the commencement of NRCPs; and,
- Covid-19 protocols had a significant impact on the ability of sites to deliver programming, starting in March 2020.
As part of a broader review and revision of correctional programs, CSC reviewed options to support Indigenous women in Secure Units to have increased access to NRCPs, provide enhanced staff training in responsivity issues, as well the possibility of modifying the Indigenous Women Offender Moderate Intensity Program to allow for additional entry points, in order to increase opportunities to begin programming on a timely basis.
CSC explored additional options to reduce the timeframe to commence programming, such as alternative work schedules for Elders to provide greater flexibility for them to tend to their community duties, and the possibility of
Elder participation via video-conference where mobility limitations existed. Despite longer wait times to commence
first institutional main NRCP, Indigenous women offenders achieved a very high NRCP completion rate, prior to their
first release.
Percentage of women who waived their full parole hearing
Unlike day parole withdrawals, the rate at which Indigenous women waived their full parole decreased since 2016-2017, despite the recent spike. Accounting for the spike in 2020-2021, the rate of day parole hearing withdrawals over the past five years decreased by nearly five percent. This general decrease was also observable among non-Indigenous women, whose full parole waiver rate decreased more than six percent from 2016-2017 to 2020-2021. A gap in results between these groups persisted despite the positive trends, though the gap narrowed.
CSC research shows that, regardless of Indigenous group, gender or risk level, the two most common reasons provided by Indigenous offenders for waving or withdrawing their parole review were program non-completion and to avoid a negative decision.
Percentage of women acquiring a discretionary release at the time of their first release date
In 2020-2021, Indigenous women offenders acquired a discretionary release at the time of first release at lower rates than non-Indigenous women. In the past five years, Indigenous women acquired discretionary releases at decreasing rates, while non-Indigenous women acquired discretionary releases at increasing rates, resulting in a widening gap.
Releases by type: 2020-2021
In 2020-2021, Indigenous women received day parole and full parole at lower rates than nonIndigenous women. While the majority of releases for Indigenous women in 2020-2021 were day parole, close to 40% were statutory releases. This compares to only 16.8% for nonIndigenous women, who were primarily released on day parole (78%). Full parole represented 5.1% of all releases for non-Indigenous women in 2020-2021, compared to less than one percent for Indigenous women. As earlier reported, Indigenous women had higher rates of withdrawing day parole and waiving full parole hearings. These increased rates meant fewer Indigenous women sought the opportunity for a day parole or full parole release in 2020-2021. This development could, in part, have contributed to lower parole releases over the reporting period, when compared to non-Indigenous women.
Percentage of women with an identified employment
need who received vocational training or certification
prior to first release
The Indigenous Offender Employment Initiative (IOEI), launched in 2017-2018 in the Prairie Region, contributed to positive results, including by reducing gaps between Indigenous and nonIndigenous offenders. Through the IOEI initiative, Indigenous individuals earned hours of onthe-job training, vocational certifications, and started career paths with transitional employment through the two Prairie Region Community Industries. To build on these successful outcomes, CSC expanded to IOEI initiative to the Ontario and Pacific Regions in 2019-2020. However, public health restrictions to curb the spread of COVID-19 infections negatively impacted operations. The COVID-19 pandemic presented challenges in the community and in institutions, which affected results in 2020-2021, which were not only influenced by interventions, but also by the availability and accessibility of training and employment opportunities in the community.
Of those with an identified need for employment in the community, the percentage of women acquiring a discretionary release at the time of their first release date
In order to identify trends and areas where interventions could be targeted, CSC undertook a preliminary qualitative review of a small sample of community releases that were revoked without a new offence by the PBC.
The review showed that Indigenous women continued to experience a greater rate of revocations without offence than non-Indigenous women, as shown in the graphic below. In an analysis of the previous five years of data, results steadily rose between 2016-2017 and 2019-2020, however, improved in 2020-2021.
The observations gleaned from the revocation review were used to inform a broader review of conditional release suspensions in order to identify reasons for the suspensions and suggest possible measures to improve results for Indigenous women.
Trends observed in the review suggested that Indigenous women offenders whose release was revoked, were more likely to have:
- an OSL increase during their incarceration;
- their first release on Statutory Release (SR);
- their release maintained prior to revocation;
- their release suspended earlier during their release than their non-Indigenous counterparts; and,
- been disproportionately revoked for a risk of deteriorating behaviour.
Supervision suspensions,
per 1000
The findings included the following:
- Indigenous women were more than twice as likely as non-Indigenous women to be suspended, and they were more likely to be suspended to prevent a breach and for the protection of society;
- The majority of the suspended women offenders had completed a main program prior to release;
- Indigenous women were slightly more likely to have responsivity issues at release;
- On average, Indigenous women offenders were in the community for shorter periods before being suspended;
- The majority of women were released on day parole; however, for those released on statutory release, Indigenous women were more likely to have residency conditions imposed;
- Indigenous women offenders, who were suspended, were rated as having higher risk and need areas and tended to be serving sentences for more violent crimes.
As a follow up to the review, CSC started exploring culturally relevant community supervision practices, methods and tools to ensure Indigenous women receive equitable access to reintegration.
Inuit considerations
Working with Inuit offenders involves unique linguistic, cultural, spiritual, and geographic considerations. While Indigenous people within Canada may share similarities in worldviews, each group has unique spiritual and cultural values, languages, dialects, and customs.
Inuit speak Inuktitut, and there are numerous dialects that vary from region to region. Inuit also have unique spiritual beliefs, which are distinct from those of First Nations and Métis cultures, and have unique social ceremonies and cultural practices.
In addition to these distinctions, many Inuit under federal correctional jurisdiction come from geographically isolated regions of Canada’s Arctic (the Northwest Territories, Nunavut, Northern Quebec, and Labrador), and when incarcerated and supervised in the south, can experience a significant culture shock. The Regions with the highest number of Inuit offenders in 2020-2021 were the Ontario and Quebec Regions, who housed offenders coming primarily from Nunavut and Nunavik.
To learn more about the Inuit population in Canada refer to the 2019-2020 ICAF (pages 67-76).
At the end of 2020-2021, there were 181 Inuit offenders under CSC jurisdiction, which represented:
- 3.2% (n=125) of Indigenous offenders in custody
- 3.0% (n=56) of Indigenous offenders supervised in the community
Of the 181 Inuit offenders under CSC jurisdiction:
- 2.2% (n= 4) were women (all supervised in the community)
- 97.7% (n=177) were men (of those, 70.6% [n=125] in custody and 29.4% [n=52] in the community)
Indigenous offenders under CSC jurisdiction
All Regions saw a decrease in Inuit offenders over the past five years, except the Pacific Region. The increase in the Pacific Region was due to transfers from their original Region of admission, in order to alleviate SIU status, or in some cases, due to a preference of Inuit offenders not to be housed with each other because of homesickness triggers. Given the overall size of the Inuit population under federal jurisdiction, the increase in the Pacific Region was relatively small, in terms of raw numbers (n=4), since 2016-2017.
In 2020-2021:
- 45.2% of Inuit offenders were serving a sentence of less than four years
- 76.9% of Inuit offenders were assessed as high-risk, and 20.3% as medium-risk
- 72.4% of Inuit offenders were serving a sentence for a Schedule I offence
- 42.6% of Inuit offenders were serving a sentence for a sex offence
Short sentence lengths, high risk assessments, and high percentages of sex offences had implications on interventions and release outcomes for Inuit offenders. These factors likely limited opportunities for Inuit offenders to participate in programs and interventions designed to help offenders heal and reintegrate into the community following their release. Moreover, they increased the likelihood that offenders necessitated lengthier and more intensive programs to fully prepare for release.
Elder reviews
63.9% of Inuit offenders received an initial Elder review in 2020-2021, compared to 77.7% of First Nations and Métis offenders.
Elders play an important role in providing cultural teachings and restorative support to offenders, and Inuit Elders are contracted to provide culturally appropriate care to Inuit offenders.
CSC continued to address challenges in the hiring and retention of Elders, including Inuit Elders. These challenges resulted in a lower number of Inuit Elders serving the Inuit population, as compared to the number of Elders serving the First Nations and Métis offender populations. NonInuit Elders may serve Inuit offenders when an Inuit Elder is not available, however, this may pose an issue in the completion of Elder reviews if the Inuit offender speaks only Inuktitut and the Elder does not.
Correctional programs
Program enrolments for inuit offenders
The percentage of program enrolments for Inuit offenders rose steadily for the past five years, with the exception of the 2020-2021 fiscal year.
OF THE OFFENDERS WITH AN IDENTIFIED NEED FOR A NATIONALLY RECOGNIZED CORRECTIONAL PROGRAM, THE PERCENTAGE WHO COMPLETE PRIOR TO FIRST RELEASE
The percentage of program completions before first release remained relatively steady in past years, before decreasing in 2020-2021.
Reintegration
Release type
Inuit offenders showed the poorest release outcomes among all demographic groups. They were released at their Statutory Release date at higher rates than other groups, obtained the lowest percentages of release on day parole, and the highest percentages of release on Sentence Expiry Date.
Discretionary release
Inuit offenders obtained the lowest percentages of discretionary release at first release (which includes Day and Full Parole). However, discretionary release results in 2020-2021 (30.8%) represented a 13% improvement from results in 2016-2017 (18.2%).
As previously noted, shorter sentence lengths, greater need for lengthy high intensity and sex offender programming, and staffing challenges for program delivery likely contributed to comparatively limited opportunities for Inuit offenders to participate in programs and interventions designed to help them heal. These factors affected the completion of programs that were critical to facilitating a safe and successful discretionary release. Offenders who tended to be more likely to be high-risk offenders and/or to have committed sex offences faced additional barriers in receiving a discretionary release due to overriding public safety concerns. Overall, the totality of these factors likely contributed to a high percentage of Inuit offenders released on Statutory Release, and a correspondingly low percentage of Inuit offenders released on Day Parole.
Inuit offenders saw the highest instances of release at Sentence Expiry Date. Many Inuit offenders under federal jurisdiction tended to come from geographically isolated regions in northern Canada, increasing the likelihood that they experienced significant culture shock when incarcerated and supervised in the southern parts of the country. Societal norms and realities of life in the North differ from those in the South, and can create challenges for Inuit offenders upon release, particularly in the case of urban releases to southern locations.
Releases away from their home communities continued to present challenges for Inuit offenders. Substance misuse programs were at times unavailable in many of Canada’s northern remote locations, leading to Inuit offenders being released to a location in the South where these programs were offered. Many Inuit communities have banned the sale and consumption of alcohol. Therefore, when Inuit offenders were incarcerated and released in the South in order to attend substance misuse programming, they were at greater risk of being exposed to problematic substances. Moreover, for offenders with release conditions tied to abstaining from problematic substances, the exposure increased the risk of a breach of conditions and return to CSC custody – contributing to increased rates of releases at Sentence Expiry Date, rather than Parole.
The high interest and low participation rates in the Section 84 release process may be attributable to conditions of release for parole, needs for programming that may have gone unfulfilled, or the dynamic of offenders returning to their remote and northern home communities, who may have had hesitations in accepting offenders back when they presented a public safety risk.
Inuit offenders continued to face a number of challenges and barriers to participating in the Section 84 release process. For many Inuit offenders, historic substance use was noted during their admission to CSC custody. CSC research indicates that alcohol and drug abuse was implicated in the offence pattern of 90% of Inuit offenders. As a result, many Inuit offenders had release conditions for participation in and completion of substance misuse programming. However, these programs were often unavailable in Inuit offenders’ home communities, preventing a Section 84 release to their home community.
Moreover, Inuit offenders were more likely to have been convicted of violent sex offences. These offences generate public safety concerns in communities, potentially preventing communities from participating in Section 84 release planning. Additionally, due to smaller population sizes in many Inuit communities, offenders may not have wished to be released to their home community for fear of reprisal or shame. Smaller communities also tended to face capacity challenges and a lack of resources to support the Section 84 release process. These and other structural barriers were likely to have contributed to the low utilization of the Section 84 release process by Inuit offenders.
Rate of revocations without offence per 1,000 offenders
In 2020-2021, Inuit offenders achieved positive results in regards to the rate of revocations without offence per 1,000 offenders.
of Inuit offenders successfully reached SED without experiencing a revocation, new charge or conviction during supervision in 2020-2021.
of Inuit offenders who reached SED in 2015-2016 were not re-admitted to federal custody within five years.
The graphic above describes that overall, 79.7% of Inuit offenders were not readmitted to federal custody within five years following Sentence Expiry Date.
Inuit reintegration in the Atlantic Region
The Atlantic region showed strong outcomes for successful Inuit reintegration. Regional staff worked to foster community connections to support Inuit offenders, which led the Region to have the most positive release outcomes for Inuit offenders in the country.
Due to the unique geographic nature of the Atlantic Region, Inuit offenders are released in St. John’s, Newfoundland to complete their parole. The parole office in this city created new positions for Indigenous Cultural Liaison Officers, which provided increased support to parolees.
Critical to the work of CSC in this location was the partnership with a local friendship centre; the First Light Friendship Centre. First Light worked closely with CSC (which provides support and funding) to tailor programs and services to the needs of Inuit offenders, which produced positive results. Due to high percentages of sex offenders among the Inuit population, Inuit tended to face challenges reintegrating the community and accessing programs while observing conditions for release, as in the case of sex offenders who were restricted from being in proximity to women or children, or attending certain locations at certain times of day. First Light worked with CSC to tailor programs so that Inuit offenders could participate while respecting their conditions of release.
First Light not only offers programs, they also provide a diverse range of services which provide holistic support to offenders, including mental health supports, employment assistance, housing assistance, assistance in obtaining identification and more. First light provides all of these supports, again, in a manner that will enable Inuit offenders to respect their release conditions. For example, Inuit offenders require cell phones in order to keep in touch with their parole officers as part of their release conditions. However, cell phones may be inaccessible to some offenders, and they may have release conditions that prohibit internet access. First Light will assist offenders in obtaining and keeping a cell phone with no internet so they are able to abide by their release conditions.
The relationship between First Light and offenders who used their services was one of trust. This added incentive for offenders to be successful on parole as they did not want to betray the trust bestowed upon them. CSC, First Light, and offenders worked together to share information, which allowed First Light to have the information needed to support offenders. The relationship of mutual trust and respect produced successful outcomes for Inuit offenders in the Region.
Conclusion – the way forward
The over-representation of Indigenous people in federal corrections has long-term impacts on Indigenous people, families, and communities. Addressing this issue demands acknowledgment of CSC’s role in perpetuating the cycle of violence and trauma, and its responsibility to help disrupt it. As a part of the federal department, CSC represents a government with a legacy of harm and violence against Indigenous people and communities, the same government that enforced Indian Residential Schools, the Pass System, and other policies with the intention to supress and eliminate Indigenous communities and ways of being and knowing. CSC is mindful of the fact that, individually and as an organization, it is a part of this tragic legacy, and that it bears part of the responsibility to reshape systems and defy practices that perpetuate harm against Indigenous people and communities.
Systemic issues require concerted effort to make systemic change. Horizontal initiatives, such as the Indigenous Justice Strategy and the Federal Framework to Reduce Recidivism, are opportunities to explore innovative approaches for meaningful and sustainable change. Collaboration across levels of government and with external partners to advance common goals, such as addressing systemic racism and discrimination, ensures a
multi-pronged approach that leverages expert knowledge and fosters sustainable co-development. By engaging with horiztonal partners, such as Indigenous Services Canada, the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation and Employment and Social Development Canada, CSC hopes to not only address over-representation of Indigenous people in federal corrections, but also support the improvement of housing, health and safety for Indigenous communities.
Launching into the year ahead, CSC hopes to repair the relationship between CSC and Indigenous communities through the Indigenous Offender Reintegration Contribution Program (IORCP). The IORCP uses a holistic and inclusive approach to place funds into the hands of Indigenous communities to respond to and develop solutions for their own community safety needs. The IORCP is just one example of CSC’s ongoing commitment to work with and fund Indigenous organizations and communities and ensure that Indigenous offenders have access to culturally relevant programming and supports in their community.Trust and self-determination are foundational to meaningful community engagement and healing. We hope this program facilitates the exchange of expertise and learning to assist Indigenous offenders in their rehabilitation and reintegration prior to release into rural and remote areas.
The Truth and Reconciliation Commission Executive Summary notes that a part of reconciliation is “following through with concrete actions that demonstrate real societal change” (Executive Summary, TRC). Pursuing real societal change is a messy, complex and arduous process. CSC has an immense responsibility on the path towards reconciliation that requires iterative inward reflection to identify what practices hold Indigenous people back from healing. With immense responsibility comes immense possibility. Sustainable societal change requires thinking and working in ways that are innovative and challenging - ways that might initially feel uncomfortable or encounter significant obstacles, but will ultimately move us towards a place of shared accountability and a new way
of healing together.
Reference index
- Source (1): Aboriginal Corrections Accountability Framework 2019-2020
- Source (2): PD National Indigenous Report Fiscal Year 2020-2021
- Source (3): Statistics Canada. 2015. Aboriginal Statistics at a Glance: 2nd Edition. Statistics Canada. Ottawa. Ontario
- Source (4): Admission, 2021-04-11
- Source (5): Performance Direct (PD) Employment & Employability Module
- Source (6): Discretionary_release, 2021-04-11
- Source (7): DP_Hearings, 2021-04-11
- Source (8) : Edu_upgrade_prior_fped , 2021-04-11
- Source (9): Escorted_temporary_absence , 2021-04-11
- Source (10): FP_hearings , 2021-04-11
- Source (11): Institutional_Charge , 2021-04-11
- Source (12): PMMR, Offender Profile, 2021-04-11
- Source (13): PMMR, Offender Profile, 2020-04-12
- Source (14): PMMR, Offender Profile, 2019-04-07
- Source (15): PMMR, Offender Profile, 2018-04-08
- Source (16): PMMR, Offender Profile, 2017-04-09
- Source (17): Security Incidents, 2021-04-11
- Source (18): PD, Segregation admission
- Source (19): Successful_supervision, 2021-04-11
- Source (20): Unescorted_temporary_absence, 2021-04-11
- Source (21): Urinalysis, 2021-04-11
- Source (22): Vocational_training_or_cert, 2021-04-11
- Source (23): AI-IMSPathways, 2021-04-11
- Source (24): Education_level_completion, 2021-04-11
- Source (25): Education_upgrade_prior_to_FPED 2021-04-11
- Source (26): NRPC PD Completion prior to DPED, report as of 2021-03
- Source (27): NRPC PD Completion prior to FPED, report as of 2021-03
- Source (28): PD Percentage of initial Offender Security Level distribution, 2021-04-11
- Source (29): PD Percentage of successful transitions to lower security, report as of 2021-03
- Source (30): PD Rate of convictions on supervision for minor moderate offences, report as of 2021-03
- Source (31): PD Rate of convictions on supervision for serious or violent offences, report as of 2021-03
- Source (32): Percentage of educational referral 120, report as of 2021-03
- Source (33): PMMR Deaths in Custody, 2021-04-11
- Source (34): Prime Completion, 2021-04-11
- Source (35): Prime Enrolments, 2021-04-11
- Source (36): Prime NRCP Demand, 2021-04-11
- Source (37): PD Rate of Revocation without offence, report as of 2021-03
- Source (38): Readmission of Offenders to custody within 5 years post SED, 2021-04-11
- Source (39): Serious Institutional Charges, 2021-04-11
- Source (40): PD First main program for Non Indigenous offenders, report as of 2021-03
- Source (41): PD First main program for Indigenous offenders, report as of 2021-03
- Source (42): PD First Readiness program for Indigenous Offenders, report as of 2021-03
- Source (43): PD First Readiness program for Non Indigenous Offenders, report as of 2021-03
- Source (44): PD Offenders with an Identified need for Employment in the Community, the percentage who secure such employment prior to sentence expiry date, report as of 2021-03
Summary of results by indicator
Assessment |
|||||||||
|
2016-2017 |
2020-2021 |
|||||||
Indigenous |
Non-Indigenous |
Indigenous |
Non-Indigenous |
||||||
# |
Indicator |
% |
# |
% |
# |
% |
# |
% |
# |
1 |
Number and percentage of newly admitted offenders screened by the Computerized |
Data reported by Health Services |
|||||||
2 |
Number and percentage of offenders with an initial security level experiencing a change to higher or lower security environment |
Higher: 10.9% |
Higher: 129 |
Higher: 489 |
Higher: 13.6% |
Higher: 15.3% |
Higher: 158 |
Higher: 342 |
Higher: 14.5% Lower: 14.1% |
Admission |
|||||||||
|
|
2016-2017 |
2020-2021 |
||||||
Indigenous |
Non-Indigenous |
Indigenous |
Non-Indigenous |
||||||
# |
Indicator |
% |
# |
% |
# |
% |
# |
% |
# |
3 |
Number and percentage of Indigenous offenders informed of section 81 and section 84 at intake |
Section 81: |
Section 81: 1081 |
n/a |
n/a |
Section 81: |
Section 81: 800 |
n/a |
n/a |
Section 84: |
Section 84: 1082 |
n/a |
n/a |
Section 84: |
Section 84: 792 |
n/a |
n/a |
||
4 |
Number and percentage of Indigenous offenders informed and interested in section 81 and section 84 at intake |
Section 81: |
Section 81: 665 |
n/a |
n/a |
Section 81: |
Section 81: 522 |
n/a |
n/a |
Section 84: |
Section 84: 667 |
n/a |
n/a |
Section 84: |
Section 84: 458 |
n/a |
n/a |
||
5 |
Number and percentage of Indigenous offenders with an initial or progress Elder review at admission |
92.4% |
1149 |
n/a |
n/a |
67.9% |
851 |
n/a |
n/a |
6 |
Number and percentage of offenders with a Security Threat Group affiliation at admission |
Information currently not available due to data quality concerns |
|
||||||
7 |
Number and percentage of offenders 30 years old or younger at admission |
49.0% |
608 |
36.2% |
1323 |
45.8% |
469 |
34.0% |
739 |
8 |
Number and percentage of offenders serving a sentence for Murder I, Murder II or Schedule 1 offence |
67.8% |
842 |
48.1% |
1755 |
71.1% |
727 |
59.7% |
1297 |
9 |
Number and percentage of offenders by dynamic need level (excludes blanks) |
High: 74.1% |
High: 919 |
High: 52.3% |
High: 1905 |
High: 85.2% |
High: 866 |
High: 64.1% |
High: 1370 |
10 |
Number and percentage of offenders by static risk level (excludes blanks) |
High: 52.5% |
High: 651 |
High: 39.8% |
High: 1451 |
High: 57.9% |
High: 589 |
High: 47.4% |
High: 1014 |
11 |
Number and percentage of offenders by reintegration level (excludes blanks) |
Multi-Level: 79.5% |
Multi-Level: |
Multi-Level: 60.6% |
Multi-Level: |
Multi-Level: 77.0% |
Multi-Level: |
Multi-Level: 58.4% |
Multi-Level:1268 |
12 |
Number and percentage of offenders admitted with a sex offence on sentence |
18.5% |
229 |
18.4% |
673 |
11.9% |
122 |
15.8% |
342 |
13 |
Number and percentage of offenders by institutional security level of admitting facility |
Multi-Level: 79.6% |
Multi-Level: |
Multi-Level: 60.6% |
Multi-Level: |
Multi-Level: 77.5% |
Multi-Level: |
Multi-Level: 58.3% |
Multi-Level: |
14 |
Number and percentage of offenders by first Offender Security Level result (excludes blanks) |
Max: 12.4% |
Max: 155 |
Max: 7.9% |
Max: 301 |
Max: 10.8% |
Max: 106 |
Max: 7.2% |
Max: 156 |
15 |
Number and percentage of offenders by first Custody Rating Scale result (excludes blanks) |
Max: 19.6% |
Max: 243 |
Max: 11.2% |
Max: 411 |
Max: 18.4% |
Max: 188 |
Max: 12.6% |
Max: 272 |
16 |
Number and percentage of offenders serving a sentence of less than 4 years |
28.5% |
353 |
26.3% |
963 |
25.6% |
242 |
26.6% |
583 |
Intervention |
||||||||||
|
|
2016-2017 |
2020-2021 |
|||||||
Indigenous |
Non-Indigenous |
Indigenous |
Non-Indigenous |
|||||||
# |
Indicator |
% |
# |
% |
# |
% |
# |
% |
# |
|
17 |
Number and percentage of offenders with an identified need who complete a correctional program prior to FPED |
62.5% |
643 |
56.2% |
1385 |
33.1% |
406 |
39.4% |
1021 |
|
18 |
Number and percentage of offenders with a CIB-accepted referral to educational upgrading within 120 days following admission out of all offenders with an identified education need |
83.7% |
575 |
69.9% |
1229 |
73.3% |
379 |
58.5% |
603 |
|
19 |
Median days from admission to first enrolment in a readiness nationally recognized correctional program |
n/a |
49.0 |
n/a |
46.0 |
n/a |
167.5 |
n/a |
133.0 |
|
20 |
Median days from admission to first enrolment in a main nationally recognized correctional program |
n/a |
148.0 |
n/a |
165.0 |
n/a |
257.0 |
n/a |
252.0 |
|
21 |
Number and percentage of offenders with an identified educational need who have upgraded their education prior to FPED |
68.7% |
527 |
53.8% |
1319 |
42.2% |
413 |
42.1% |
800 |
|
22 |
Number of deaths in custody (except death by natural causes). |
n/a |
3 |
n/a |
6 |
n/a |
11 |
n/a |
8 |
|
23 |
Number and percentage of offenders who received an institutional mental health service |
Data reported by Health Services |
|
|
||||||
24 |
Serious institutional charges per 1 000 offenders |
n/a |
587 |
n/a |
383 |
n/a |
355 |
n/a |
211 |
|
25 |
Number of offenders involved in security incidents per 1 000 offenders |
n/a |
680 |
n/a |
328 |
n/a |
840 |
n/a |
537 |
|
26 |
Number and percentage of positive results from random-sample urinalysis tests |
6.8% |
288 |
5.7% |
655 |
14.0% |
150 |
10.9% |
307 |
27 |
Number and percentage of offenders that acquired a discretionary release at the time of their first release |
35.8% |
418 |
54%. |
2142 |
38.6% |
467 |
|
58.2% |
1798 |
28 |
Number and percentage of Indigenous offenders with a Section 84 release plan prior to 1st release |
40.9% |
320 |
n/a |
n/a |
36.2% |
306 |
|
n/a |
n/a |
29 |
Number and percentage of offenders incarcerated past statutory release date (offenders detained) |
8.0% |
302 |
4.9% |
506 |
7.5% |
292 |
|
3.9% |
328 |
30 |
Number and percentage of successfully completed Unescorted Temporary Absences (UTAs) excluding medical UTAs |
1270 |
99.2% |
99.2% |
2515 |
95.5% |
21 |
|
94.1% |
48 |
31 |
Number and percentage of successfully completed Escorted Temporary Absences (ETAs) excluding medical ETAs |
99.7% |
14349 |
99.8% |
34073 |
99.6% |
822 |
|
99.5% |
1749 |
32 |
Number and percentage of offenders with mental health needs who are granted day or |
Data reported by Health Services |
|
|
|
|||||
33 |
Number and percentage of successful offender transitions from maximum or medium security to a lower offender security level (OSL) per the total number of maximum or medium transitions to lower security |
96.2% |
554 |
96.2% |
1124 |
93.2% |
425 |
|
92.3% |
454 |
34 |
Number and percentage of offenders who withdrew their day parole hearing out of those eligible for review (data excludes waived decisions) |
11.3% |
178 |
8.2% |
450 |
8.5% |
199 |
|
6.8% |
437 |
35 |
Number and percentage of offenders who waived their full parole hearing out of those eligible for review |
37.8% |
1043 |
26.2% |
2451 |
26.2% |
840 |
|
15.4% |
1518 |
36 |
Number and percentage of offenders who postponed their day parole hearing out of those eligible for review (data excludes waived decisions) |
29.8% |
469 |
22.0% |
1206 |
36.8% |
867 |
|
32.8% |
2102 |
37 |
Number and percentage of offenders who postponed their full parole hearing out of those eligible for review |
24.3% |
669 |
19.5% |
1885 |
30.6% |
1156 |
|
25.4% |
2506 |
38 |
Number and percentage of offenders whose day parole hearing was adjourned out of those eligible for review (data excludes waived decisions) |
1.7% |
27 |
1.4% |
75 |
1.9% |
44 |
|
1.6% |
102 |
39 |
Number and percentage of offenders whose full parole hearing was adjourned out of those eligible for review |
0.8% |
21 |
0.6% |
61 |
0.6% |
21 |
|
0.9% |
91 |
40 |
Number and percentage of offenders who reached their SED without experiencing a revocation and/or charge and/or conviction while on supervision |
41.6% |
443 |
63.8% |
2318 |
44.9% |
540 |
|
67.2% |
2333 |
41 |
Number and percentage of offenders with an employment need who secured employment in the community prior to reaching SED |
60.0% |
394 |
80.4% |
1167 |
56.3% |
402 |
|
81.4% |
1061 |
42 |
Number and percentage of offenders with an identified employment need who have received vocational training or certification prior to first release |
60.3% |
511 |
57.4% |
1045 |
61.6% |
568 |
|
61.3% |
833 |
43 |
Percentage of time employed in the community |
52.8% |
n/a |
67.3% |
n/a |
52.2% |
n/a |
|
67.5% |
n/a |
44 |
Number and percentage of offenders who were re-admitted to federal custody on a new sentence within 5 years following SED |
22.2% |
220 |
13.4% |
507 |
19.4% |
217 |
|
10.4 |
382 |
45 |
Number and percentage of offenders who received a community mental health service |
Data reported by Health Services |
|
|
|
National Indigenous Plan |
|||||||||
|
|
2016-2017 |
2020-2021 |
||||||
Indigenous |
Non-Indigenous |
Indigenous |
Non-Indigenous |
||||||
# |
Indicator |
% |
# |
% |
# |
% |
# |
% |
# |
|
Of the Indigenous offenders with an identified need for a nationally recognized correctional program, the percentage who |
94.7% |
923 |
n/a |
n/a |
81.3% |
867 |
n/a |
n/a |
|
Of the Indigenous offenders who enrolled prior to first release, the percentage who enrolled in cultural-specific indicator |
64.7% |
597 |
n/a |
n/a |
77.7% |
674 |
n/a |
n/a |
|
Of the Indigenous offenders with an identified need for a nationally recognized correctional program, the percentage with an accepted referral in concordance with their identified preference for cultural-specific Indigenous or mainstream correctional programs |
76.3% |
1113 |
n/a |
n/a |
84.0% |
853 |
n/a |
n/a |
|
Of the Indigenous offenders with an identified need for a nationally recognized correctional program, the percentage who complete prior to first release |
87.8% |
856 |
n/a |
n/a |
64.9% |
692 |
n/a |
n/a |
|
Of the Indigenous offenders who completed program prior to first release, the percentage |
62.9% |
538 |
n/a |
n/a |
77.0% |
533 |
n/a |
n/a |
|
Percentage of successful transitions to lower security for Indigenous offenders (successful if no reclassification to higher security within 120 days |
96.2% |
554 |
n/a |
n/a |
93.2% |
425 |
n/a |
n/a |
|
Percentage of successful transfers to |
91.5% |
214 |
n/a |
n/a |
95.9% |
185 |
n/a |
n/a |
|
Percentage of institutional random-sample urinalysis positives for Indigenous offenders |
6.8% |
288 |
n/a |
n/a |
14.0% |
150 |
n/a |
n/a |
|
Percentage of institutional random-sample urinalysis refusals for Indigenous offenders |
6.9% |
296 |
n/a |
n/a |
13.7% |
147 |
n/a |
n/a |
|
Rate of serious security charges per 1,000 offenders in federal custody for Indigenous offenders |
n/a |
567.9 |
n/a |
n/a |
n/a |
361.0 |
n/a |
n/a |
|
Percentage of Indigenous offenders with an |
40.9% |
320 |
n/a |
n/a |
36.2% |
306 |
n/a |
n/a |
|
Percentage of Indigenous offenders released to a CCRA Section 84 community (based on offenders with an established CCRA Section 84 release plan) |
58.5% |
367 |
n/a |
n/a |
44.6% |
239 |
n/a |
n/a |
|
Percentage of Indigenous offenders who were granted a discretionary release at the time of their first release |
35.8% |
418 |
n/a |
n/a |
38.6% |
467 |
n/a |
n/a |
|
Rate of supervision suspensions per 1,000 offenders for Indigenous offenders |
n/a |
1230.8 |
n/a |
n/a |
n/a |
1108.7 |
n/a |
n/a |
|
Percentage of Indigenous offenders on conditional release successfully reaching sentence expiry date without re-admission (no revocation, charge or conviction) |
41.6% |
443 |
n/a |
n/a |
44.9% |
540 |
n/a |
n/a |
Human Resources Management |
|||||||||
|
|
2016-2017 |
2020-2021 |
||||||
Indigenous |
Non-Indigenous |
Indigenous |
Non-Indigenous |
||||||
# |
Indicator |
% |
# |
% |
# |
% |
# |
% |
# |
31 |
Number of Indigenous employees per occupational group as compared to nonIndigenous employees. |
Data reported by Human Resources |
|
|
|
||||
32 |
Number of CSC staff who receive Indigenous Perceptions Training. |
Data reported by Human Resources |
|
|
|
||||
33 |
Number of Indigenous staff receiving language training. |
Data reported by Human Resources |
|
|
|
||||
34 |
Number of Indigenous staff grievances. |
Data reported by Human Resources |
|
|
|
||||
35 |
The rate of promotion of Indigenous staff members in CSC. |
Data reported by Human Resources |
|
|
|
Related information
Indigenous corrections: Interventions for Indigenous offenders, healing lodges, the National Indigenous Plan, Sections 81 and 84, Indigenous Intervention Centers.
Page details
- Date modified:
Page details
- Date modified: