This statistic shows the percentage of Canadian First Nations youth that had been diagnosed with select mental health disorders as of *********. According to the data, *** percent of First Nations youth had been diagnosed with anxiety.

This statistic shows the percentage of Canadian First Nations youth that had been diagnosed with select mental health disorders and were receiving treatment for those disorders as of 2015-2016. According to the survey, **** percent of youth with ADD/ADHD had received treatment for their disorder.

Information on how youth and students can help prevent the spread of COVID-19, including prevention, mental and physical health, financial support, avoid scams and information for indigenous youth and if you are experiencing family violence.

Information on how youth and students can help prevent the spread of COVID-19, including prevention, mental and physical health, financial support, avoid scams and information for indigenous youth and if you are experiencing family violence.

The Department of Justice Canada funds projects through the Youth Justice Fund that seek to help youth who are involved in the criminal justice system (CJS). The Youth Justice Fund provides grants and contributions to projects that encourage a more effective youth justice system, respond to emerging youth justice issues, and enable greater citizen and community participation in the youth justice system. In 2020, the Research and Statistics Division reviewed the evaluation reports that were submitted for pilot projects and received funds from 2014 to 2019. The review does not measure whether each program succeeded in meeting its goals, but rather identifies key program areas that received funding and looks for common challenges, best practices, and gaps identified by the program organizations that might help inform future projects. Program Areas Fetal Alcohol Syndrome Disorder (FASD) Fetal Alcohol Syndrome Disorder (FASD) is an umbrella term used to describe diagnoses that are caused by pre-natal alcohol exposure (Fraser 2011). People with FASD are overrepresented as both offenders and victims in the CJS. FASD is a lifelong disability, and people with FASD often struggle with other major issues, such as drug or alcohol dependency, depression, and mental health challenges. Several of the funded programs offer services to people with FASD (or suspected of having FASD). Many offer intensive one-on-one counselling as well as support finding housing and dealing with mental health issues and addiction. Learning difficulties often make education and employment a challenge. Many youth with FASD struggle to live independently and need help with basic needs – housing and food. Trauma-informed practices Trauma is a known risk factor for youth involved in the CJS (Wolff and Shi 2012) and several programs focus on helping youth in conflict with the law deal with trauma. Some funded programs use a trauma-informed approach and some encourage general mental health and wellness. Few of the programs define their trauma-informed approach. Culturally sensitive approaches – specifically for Indigenous youth Indigenous youth are overrepresented in the CJS as both offenders and victims (Department of Justice Canada 2019). More and more service providers are offering culturally relevant programming to Indigenous clients. Several of the funded programs provide details on the types of activities that they offer. Several evaluations were done to see if staff had the capacity to provide appropriate services. There is strong support for more culturally relevant programming and more training for service providers. Culturally sensitive approaches – new immigrants and visible minorities Several programs receiving funding offer specialized services to marginalized youth. Youth who are visible minorities speak of racism and barriers to success because of how they are perceived. Newcomers to Canada sometimes struggle to adapt. Several programs had notable success with mentoring programs that paired youth with mentors from their communities. Female youth involved in the CJS Among youth involved in the CJS, boys outnumber girls (in 2014, 72% of youth charged with a crime were male) (Allen and Superle 2016), but it has long been argued that girls need specialized programming to deal with their specific needs, rather than being included in programs designed for boys. A number of funded projects focus on girls involved in the CJS, including one program in Manitoba, called the “Empower Project” that focuses on girls with FASD. Substance use and addiction Problematic substance use and addiction often lead to involvement with the CJS (Health Canada September 2018). Most of the funded programs that help youth deal with substance use issues focus on teaching youth to make better decisions, develop resilience, and improve life skills. Many youth participants in these programs have multiple risk factors – substance use, addiction, experience of trauma, mental health problems, and family conflict. Gang involvement Many programs that received funding reach out to youth who are involved in gangs or at risk of becoming involved with gangs. Some of these youth also have issues with substance use, addiction, trauma, and mental health. In both Ontario and Saskatchewan, there are community outreach groups that are working on developing comprehensive strategies to deal with gangs in their communities. Life skills / employment A number of funded programs focus on preparing youth for reintegration into their communities. Some of these programs help youth achieve educational goals as well as provide support in finding employment. Challenges Finding and keeping appropriate staff: many of the programs reviewed struggle to hire and retain staff. Referrals: several funded programs describe challenges with their referring partners, where service providers receive fewer clients than expected or fewer clients who meet the profile for their specific program. Funding: Concern over inconsistent funding is common. Tracking participants after completion of program or sentence: Several funded programs struggle to maintain contact with participants, thus limiting their ability to solicit feedback from clients after the program finished. Identified gaps Individualization of programming: A number of reviews suggest that their clients need accurate assessment and programming that is personalized to individual needs; their clients do not “fit” well into existing curricula. Support for basics: Many youth, especially those with FASD, need help with basic needs – food and housing – before their problems with substance use, addiction, mental health, family conflict, and skill development can be addressed. More education on Indigenous history and cultures: There is strong support for more culturally specific programming and training to enhance cultural competencies. More female-specific programing and female staff/mentors: Several funded programs note that female clients appreciate girl-only outings or programming and requested more female staff and mentors. Reach out to visible minorities and recent immigrants Youth who are visible minorities may need specific programs that address racism; youth who are recent immigrants may need support to navigate the challenges of adapting to Canadian culture. Neither are well served by mainstream programs. Support for families, not just youth in isolation:: Several funded programs indicate that youth in contact with the CJS are often dealing with conflict within their own families and that greater support for families is needed.

Background: The concept of resilience offers a strengths-based framework for interventions to enhance Indigenous adolescent social and emotional well-being. Resilience interventions in or with schools encompass individual, social, and environmental factors that encourage health-promoting behaviors and assist adolescents in navigating toward resources that can sustain their health and well-being in times of adversity. This scoping review examined the literature on resilience-enhancing interventions for Indigenous adolescent students in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the United States (CANZUS nations). Intervention strategies, adherence to theoretical constructs, and outcomes were analyzed.Methods: A systematic search was conducted of intervention studies aimed at improving Indigenous adolescent resilience and published in CANZUS nations between January 1990 and May 2016. Eleven peer-reviewed databases and 11 websites and clearing houses were searched for relevant studies. Following double-blinded screening, a total of 16 intervention papers were included for analysis. Study characteristics were identified and study quality was assessed using appropriate assessment tools.Results: Twelve interventions (75%) were delivered in school settings and four (25%) were community-based, conducted in partnership with schools. Seven publications (44%) reported interventions focused exclusively on fostering individual resilience. Another seven (44%) included components that aimed to build staff, school, and/or community capacity to support adolescent resilience, and two (12.5%) had community/school capacity-building as the primary focus. Culturally based approaches to enhancing resilience were evident in most studies (81%). The publications documented the use of a range of program models, processes, and activities aligned with resilience theory. Positive outcomes were reported for improved individual assets (e.g., strengthened self-esteem and Indigenous identity), environmental resources (e.g., increased peer support and social/community connection), and increased community capacity (e.g., increased youth training and leadership opportunities). On average, study quality was assessed as moderate to high. The strongest evidence of intervention effectiveness was for improvements in mental health symptoms and outcomes.Conclusion: Interventions indicated strong alignment with ecological and culturally based resilience theories and models. While the results of the studies indicate some positive impacts on the resilience of Indigenous adolescents, future evaluations should aim to ensure high study quality and focus on measuring strengths-based resilience outcomes.

BackgroundHomelessness is one of the most disabling and precarious living conditions. The objective of this Delphi consensus study was to identify priority needs and at-risk population subgroups among homeless and vulnerably housed people to guide the development of a more responsive and person-centred clinical practice guideline.MethodsWe used a literature review and expert working group to produce an initial list of needs and at-risk subgroups of homeless and vulnerably housed populations. We then followed a modified Delphi consensus method, asking expert health professionals, using electronic surveys, and persons with lived experience of homelessness, using oral surveys, to prioritize needs and at-risk sub-populations across Canada. Criteria for ranking included potential for impact, extent of inequities and burden of illness. We set ratings of ≥ 60% to determine consensus over three rounds of surveys.FindingsEighty four health professionals and 76 persons with lived experience of homelessness participated from across Canada, achieving an overall 73% response rate. The participants identified priority needs including mental health and addiction care, facilitating access to permanent housing, facilitating access to income support and case management/care coordination. Participants also ranked specific homeless sub-populations in need of additional research including: Indigenous Peoples (First Nations, Métis, and Inuit); youth, women and families; people with acquired brain injury, intellectual or physical disabilities; and refugees and other migrants.InterpretationThe inclusion of the perspectives of both expert health professionals and people with lived experience of homelessness provided validity in identifying real-world needs to guide systematic reviews in four key areas according to priority needs, as well as launch a number of working groups to explore how to adapt interventions for specific at-risk populations, to create evidence-based guidelines.

The Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA) came into force on April 1, 2003 to assist in reducing the notably high Canadian youth custody rate. The YCJA promotes youth rehabilitation and reintegration into society through diversion from the formal justice system and greater community involvement in responding to youth crime. It also promotes responsibility and accountability through measures that are proportionate to the seriousness of the offence and the youth’s stage of development. In support of these goals, section 19 of the YCJA introduced conferences as a means to assist both decision makers and youth involved in the criminal justice system (CJS). Section 19 conferences provide an opportunity for various professionals and stakeholders, including the young person concerned and their family, to come together to discuss the matter in a more informal setting in order to formulate recommendations about the young person’s case. Despite the introduction of section 19 conferences almost 20 years ago, there has been little information gathered on the extent of their use, how they are being conducted, and the associated outcomes. In 2020, the Department of Justice Canada undertook a national survey to fill this knowledge gap. An invitation to complete the electronic survey was sent to provincial and territorial representatives of the Coordinating Committee of Senior Officials – Youth Justice. All 13 jurisdictions completed the survey. The focus of this research was to better understand how provinces and territories are using section 19 of the YCJA (and other related sections). This research also aimed to gain insight into ways of addressing the overrepresentation of Indigenous and racialized youth in the CJS.The focus of this research was to better understand how provinces and territories are using section 19 of the YCJA (and other related sections). This research also aimed to gain insight into ways of addressing the overrepresentation of Indigenous and racialized youth in the CJS. Many aspects of section 19 conferences were examined, including: Extent of use of conferences; Purposes and processes of conferences; Benefits of conferences; Challenges of conferences; and Data collection, evaluations and impact assessments. Results indicated that all jurisdictions convene section 19 conferences, with the exception of Quebec and the Yukon. Most jurisdictions reported having developed either rules, policies, guidelines and/or programs pertaining to the convening of conferences, although these varied widely. Conferences were reported to be convened at all stages of the CJS, with most jurisdictions convening them at the post-charge/pre-finding of guilt, post-finding of guilt/pre-sentence and post-sentencing stages. Slightly fewer jurisdictions reported convening conferences at the pre-charge stage. Jurisdictions noted that conferences were convened for a variety of purposes, most notably as a means to attain advice on a sentencing plan or to assist in the process of developing a sentencing plan, to coordinate social services, to determine appropriate extrajudicial sanctions, as well as to determine conditions for judicial interim release (i.e., bail). Jurisdictions described differing processes for convening section 19 conferences. Four jurisdictions reported having dedicated resources for organizing conferences. In terms of who convenes conferences, jurisdictions noted that various professionals may do so, such as provincial directors or delegates, probation officers, youth workers, mental-health workers, police officers, Crown prosecutors, Justices of the Peace, or defence counsels, among others. Further, several jurisdictions reported that conferences were convened by judges, which is consistent with section 41 of the YCJA. Those who took part in a conference (as participants) also varied by jurisdiction, but generally included the youth, family or other support people, probation officers, social workers, child welfare representatives, mental health workers, school representatives, as well as Elders or an Indigenous representative. Other less frequently noted types of participants included police officers, Crown prosecutors, the defence counsels, educators, interpreters, as well as victims and their family and other support people of the victim. Alberta was the only jurisdiction to report eligibility criteria to participate in a conference. These criteria pertained to youth and offence characteristics. However, a review of policy/guideline/program documents provided by other jurisdictions identified a number of situations or circumstances that lead to the consideration of a section 19 conference. These included, for example, complex cases where custody is considered or when dealing with chronic re-offending. Conversely, only the Northwest Territories prohibited the use of section 19 conferences in certain circumstances (i.e., when charges related to specific types of offences such as murder). Notable benefits of section 19 conferences were reported, such as: Increasing involvement and buy-in of youth in their case; Helping address diverse and complex needs (e.g., youth who are under the jurisdictions of both child welfare services and the CJS, those with cognitive abilities); Increasing collaboration between justice actors and between social systems for better case planning; Providing an opportunity for restorative justice; and, Leading to reduced charges and recidivism. Further, many jurisdictions confirmed that conferences allowed accommodations and adaptions for diversity, which included accommodations specific to Indigenous identity, cultural and/or linguistic background, gender and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, and asexual (LGBTQIA+) identities, mental health and/or addiction issues, in addition to accommodations for cognitive disabilities. A number of challenges and areas for improvement pertaining to section 19 conferences were highlighted by jurisdictions. These included: Scheduling, time requirements, and logistical issues (e.g., conflicting schedules, lack of dedicated coordinators; technological limitations around access to phones and internet); Difficulties getting people to support and participate in conferences; and, Limited availability of community programs, resources and supports for case planning. Less than half of jurisdictions reported collecting some form of administrative data on various aspects of section 19 conferences (e.g., number, youth characteristics, purposes, participants, outcome and cost). Three jurisdictions (Alberta, Saskatchewan, and New Brunswick) reported having conducted an evaluation or impact assessment. Similar benefits and challenges as those reported in this study were found by these assessments. Despite the widespread use of section 19 conferences across Canada, the current research has demonstrated that there are limited data collected across Canada on the use of section 19 conferences and their outcomes. However, the many benefits of section 19 conferences highlighted in this study provide support for further consideration of expanding the use of section 19 conferences across Canada. This could better support youth involved in the CJS and possibly help contribute to a reduction in the overrepresentation of Indigenous and racialized youth in custody.