Methodology

Justice Canada developed an electronic survey to collect information on the use of section 19 conferences in different jurisdictions across Canada. The survey addressed specific topics including: uses, purposes and processes of conferences; development of rules, policies, guidelines and programs; existence of dedicated resources; benefits and challenges; accommodation/adaptation of processes; assessment and data collection; and reporting protocols. The electronic survey was designed using Simple Survey, and was launched in March 2020. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the original deadline for the completion of the survey was extended from June 2020 to December 2020.

The survey was sent to provincial and territorial representatives of the Coordinating Committee of Senior Officials (CCSO) – Youth Justice. Representatives were asked to coordinate a single survey response for their respective jurisdiction. All 13 jurisdictions completed the survey. Most jurisdictions completed the survey using the online platform, but a number submitted their response using a paper copy. These paper responses were entered into the online platform by Justice Canada employees.

Jurisdictions were asked a number of closed-ended and open-ended questions. Survey data were analyzed using both qualitative (thematic coding) and quantitative (frequencies and counts) methods. Due to the nature of the survey, which included a low number of respondents by design, the quantitative data are mostly reported qualitatively.

In addition, some jurisdictions provided policy and guideline documents, as well as other related information (see Appendix B). These documents were reviewed and relevant content was summarized and included throughout the report, where appropriate.

Limitations

A noteworthy limitation of this study is the absence of the perceptions of youth, their families, and other support people regarding the benefits and challenges of section 19 conference. The perceptions presented in this report are solely those of justice and public safety professionals.

Another related limitation of this study lies in the approach selected to obtain information on current practices pertaining to section 19 conferences in each jurisdiction. A key representative from justice and public safety agencies in each jurisdiction was asked to consult with their respective colleagues and partners to answer survey questions to the best of their knowledge. Although it is reasonable to assume that the responses provided are indicative of the majority of conferencing practices, it is possible that this information may be incomplete.

Finally, section 19 of the YCJA provides a high level of flexibility to the provinces and territories in terms of implementation. Consequently, there are vast differences in the way this section has been applied across Canada. Although the survey attempted to group the various facets of conferences into standardized categories to keep reporting manageable, this may conceal some of the intricate details of rules, policies, guidelines and programs that are specific to each jurisdiction.