Annual Report
2010-2011

110-425 Bloor Street East
Toronto, ON
M4W 3R4

Vision and Mission Statement

VISION

A world in which all people with disabilities enjoy social justice and equal participation in society and our communities 

MISSION STATEMENT

ARCH Disability Law Centre, as a specialty legal clinic with a provincial mandate, undertakes to achieve this Vision by: 
•	Ensuring our work has Ontario wide impact 
Focusing on, identifying and removing systemic barriers 
•	Addressing issues that have an impact on low income people with disabilities, including the root causes of poverty 
•	Empowering people with disabilities 
•	Being recognized as experts in the law as it affects people with disabilities 
•	Addressing the heightened disadvantage, marginalization and exclusion faced by people with disabilities by reason of factors such as gender, race, age, language, economic status and sexual orientation.
VALUES AND PRINCIPLES

ARCH is guided by the following set of core values:

•	The dignity and worth of all persons with disabilities must be respected;
•	Persons with disabilities have the right to life, self-determination, and full participation in a society free from barriers to their inclusion and integration;
•	Persons with disabilities themselves are in the best position to determine their own priorities;
•	All persons have a common responsibility to create communities accessible to all persons with disabilities.

Additionally, ARCH is guided by the following set of core organizational principles:

•	ARCH operates in accordance with the above core values;
•	ARCH is a community-based organization, governed by a Board of Directors composed of a majority of persons with disabilities;
•	ARCH is accountable to persons with disabilities in Ontario, its members and its funders.
Adopted by the Board of Directors, November 23, 2010

Chair’s Report
April 1, 2010 – March 31, 2011

As I reviewed past reports I have had the honour to deliver as the Chair of ARCH I realized that I have spent a lot of effort explaining the nature of the changes ARCH faces, and the challenges these changes pose for our work.  I don’t propose to do so in this report.

There is a simple reason for this.  We are in the change business.  It is our mandate to reject the current state of affairs that confront the members of the disability community and make it better.  If legislation needs to be enacted or amended, ARCH is there to advocate for that change.  If legislation or common law rights are not being properly recognized, ARCH goes to court to ensure that they are.  ARCH and its staff have done all this and more in the past year, and will continue to do so in the coming year, whatever challenges we face.

We also have a mission to educate the public and the legal profession.  Through a variety of means, including ARCH Alert, symposia and presentations to groups and organizations with particular interests ARCH staff has been getting the word out.

When we look ahead to the work that needs to be done, it can become discouraging because it is clear that the task is monumental.  However, when we look back to the state of affairs that existed when ARCH began, it is clear that everyone in the disability community, including ARCH, have accomplished a great deal in those thirty years.  Step by step, and foot by foot ARCH plans to move forward.  If we can’t go over an obstacle we will go around it.  We have important work to do, and we don’t intend to stop.

The Board’s task is to ensure that ARCH stays on track and has the tools it needs to do the job.  We’re on it.  Staff’s job is to challenge, change and educate.  They are on it.  Starting with our Executive Director ARCH has an impressive team hard at work to improve the lot of those in Ontario with disabilities.  I cannot believe the extent of their qualifications and experience.  The Board certainly appreciates their dedication to the job.  One of the perverse advantages of the level of pay we are able to offer, which is lower than those skills would command with many other employers, is that our staff are motivated by ARCH’s mission and not the pay.  On behalf of the Board and the membership, I want to thank every member of staff for their hard work this past year.

I also want to thank the other members of the Board for their vision and hard work.  There is one person in particular I would like to thank, our Treasurer Monica Ackermann.  It isn’t an easy job.  Under her stewardship, with help from Ivana and Doreen, the financial systems we have in place have improved significantly and the financial reports that the Board receives and approves are much easier to understand.

I am looking forward to working with all of you to make 2012 a better year than 2011, and to set the path for better years to come.

Peter Wells,
President and Chair,
ARCH Disability Law Centre

Executive Director’s Report
October 2010 to September 2011

On behalf of the staff of ARCH, I am very pleased to report to our members on the work of ARCH during this past year. This year has seen several changes at ARCH.  We have revised our Strategic Plan, our Mission and Vision Statements, acquired new staff and taken on several important projects on behalf of the disability community. ARCH’s staff continue to provide legal services and advocate for our community of people with disabilities with commitment and excellence. I thank each of them for their fine work and dedication.

ARCH’s Board of Directors continues to provide the leadership, governance and vision that maintain our organizational health and stability. Most importantly, our Board keeps us rooted and responsive to the community we are mandated to serve.  I am grateful to each of them for this guidance and for their unwavering commitment to the mission of ARCH.

Legal Services for Ontarians With Disabilities 

ARCH continues to provide a Summary Advice and Referral Service to Ontarians with Disabilities. In addition, ARCH has substantially increased its activities in providing additional legal services to individual callers if eligibility requirements are met. We refer to this portion of our service as Brief Services. The Summary Advice and Referral Service, and Brief Services, are provided directly by ARCH lawyers.

Through ARCH’s Summary Advice and Referral Service, our staff provide summary advice, legal information, and referrals to people with disabilities across the province of Ontario. It is primarily a telephone service but other methods of communication, including in person meetings and email correspondence, are provided to accommodate disability. 

In the past year, ARCH’s activities providing Brief Services to Ontarians with disabilities have continued to increase. This service is primarily focused on ARCH’s priority areas but as with our Summary Advice and Referral Service, it is not limited to those areas. Brief Services may include the provision of a legal opinion on a specific matter, negotiating with service providers or opposing parties on behalf of the individual to resolve the matter, and investigating the legal merits of a matter. The following are several examples of Brief Services provided by ARCH lawyers in the past year:

•	ARCH assisted a woman who drives a modified vehicle by advocating to have her license suspension lifted.  The woman was involved in a very minor motor vehicle accident that was caused by slippery road conditions. When the accident was reported her license was immediately suspended until she underwent a fitness-to-drive test. After arguing that the Ministry of Transportation was discriminating against her because of her disability by requiring her to prove her fitness when such a test was not required of other drivers, the Ministry lifted the suspension.

•	ARCH assisted a man whose Attendant Outreach Services were cut when the service provider decided that he could no longer direct his care. The man communicates mostly through signs, gestures and written communication.  Those who provide the attendant services have never told him that they could not understand his directions but a manager of the service provider assessed him and determined that he was no longer eligible for the services as he could no longer communicate his needs. 

•	ARCH has assisted several people who wish to regain control over their financial decision making powers or to substitute the Ontario Public Guardian and Trustee for a trusted individual to assist in decision making. 

•	ARCH assisted a young man and his mother in advocating for change to better address the needs of students who are enrolled in an educational program aimed at assisting students to transition from high school to work or post secondary school.  Our client was accepted into the program but was asked to leave the program with only two days notice when his autism manifested in behaviours that the program staff failed to accommodate. The program staff failed to learn about autism or to attempt to understand how to assist this man to complete the program. As a result of discussions between the family and many of the stakeholders of the education program, some training and changes have been implemented. 

•	ARCH assisted a young person with an acquired brain injury to receive the supports and services he needed to complete high school when these supports were withdrawn.  Although the young man was prepared to go to the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, a new Manager at his local school board was agreeable to a negotiated settlement that satisfied all of the parties.

•	One of our clients had multiple disabilities requiring a minimum of hours provided by an attendant.  After she was “re-evaluated” her services were cut. The client was finding it difficult to manage and her eating and hygiene suffered dramatically.  We filed a complaint with the Health Services Appeal and Review Board.  After discussions with counsel for the service provider, and submitting significant evidence, her hours were reinstated without the need to a hearing.

Significant Cases

ARCH engages in litigation on behalf of groups and individuals in cases in which potential outcomes will have broad impact on people with disabilities. In pursuing these cases, ARCH strives to provide decision makers with a disability perspective, with the goal of changing existing laws and/or advancing the rights of people with disabilities. Additionally, ARCH has taken on a larger role representing individuals in the current four priority areas as outlined above. The following is a summary of some of ARCH’s litigation activities.

Alberta (Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development) v. Cunningham
In December 2010, the Supreme Court of Canada heard the appeal of Alberta (Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development) v. Cunningham. In this appeal the Supreme Court determined whether provisions in the Métis Settlement Act (MSA), which prohibit members of the Métis Settlement from also having status under the Indian Act, breached Section 15 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. 
The Cunningham’s had lived on the Peavine Settlement and had been long-standing members of that Métis Settlement. They sought full status under the Indian Act in order to access medical benefits. After they obtained Indian Act status, their Peavine membership was terminated.  They argued the prohibitive provisions of the Métis Settlement Act violated their guarantee of equality under Section 15 of the Charter. 
ARCH lawyers, Laurie Letheren and Tess Sheldon, represented the Canadian Association for Community Living (CACL) as interveners before the Supreme Court. At issue for the CACL was the scope of the protection Section 15 (2) of the Charter that is provided to ameliorative programs. Ameliorative programs, often referred to as affirmative action programs, are those that provide a service or benefit to a disadvantaged group without providing the same service or benefit to the population as a whole. 
The CACL argued the government has too often used the label of ‘ameliorative program’ to shield legislation from Section 15 (1) scrutiny. Their position was that the scope of Section 15(2) should be limited to protecting ameliorative legislation or programs from claims of ‘reverse discrimination’ where a claimant is attacking the existence of the program. The CACL argued that a program that is designed to benefit a disadvantaged group can still have a discriminatory impact on members of another disadvantaged group. Members of this second group should be able to question why they are not included under the benefits provided. Such claims deserve full scrutiny under Section 15 (1). CACL argued, for example, that a program designed to provide supports and assistance to post secondary education students that is available only to students with physical disabilities should be open to challenge by students with mental health or intellectual disabilities whose exclusion from the program may be based on prejudicial views about their likely attendance at post secondary schools. 

The Supreme Court released it decision in this case on July 21, 2011. The Court found that the exclusion of status Indians from membership in Métis Settlements was rationally connected to the ameliorative purpose of the Métis Settlement Act and was therefore protected by Section 15(2).
Unfortunately the Court largely rejected the arguments made by CACL and other equality rights organizations such as the Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund and Native Women’s Association of Canada in favour of an application of Section 15(2) that defers to government priorities. The Court stated: “If governments are obliged to benefit all disadvantaged people (or all subsets of disadvantaged people) equally, they may be precluded from using targeted programs to achieve specific goals relating to specific groups … All the government need show is that it was rational for the state to conclude that the means chosen to reach its ameliorative goal would contribute to [its ameliorative] purpose”.
While the judgment was disappointing, the Court did reinforce the requirement that the government program must be genuinely ameliorative in order to gain protection. In interpreting the purpose of the program, courts must consider statutory interpretation, legislative intent, legislative history and “the history and social situation of the affected groups.” These considerations should mean that programs are not immune from equality challenges simply because the government makes a bald statement that the programs are ameliorative. 
The Court may have left some room for future challenges to government claims that all ameliorative programs are protected from Charter scrutiny. The Chief Justice wrote, “These propositions, as discussed [in this decision], suffice to resolve the issue that arises in this case. What is at issue here is a special type of ameliorative program - one designed to enhance and preserve the identity, culture and self-governance of a constitutionally-recognized group”. She suggested that the analysis applied to ameliorative programs may develop differently in “in different types of cases.” The Chief Justice stated that “The law is best left to develop on an incremental basis” so there remains a possibility that the CACL’s concerns can regain a voice in future equality cases. 
Challenges to Restrictive Zoning By-Laws
The Dream Team, a group of psychiatric/consumer survivors who advocate for secure and supportive housing, launched human rights applications against the City of Sarnia, City of Kitchener, City of Toronto, and Smiths Falls. The basis of these applications is that each of these municipalities has zoning by-laws that limit the proximity of group homes or supported living homes. These by-laws have a discriminatory impact on people with disabilities who often seek these types of supportive housing. Some by-laws actually restrict the number of people with disabilities who can live in the municipality. ARCH represents People First Ontario who have sought intervener status in these human rights applications.  A number of mediation sessions have been held which have resulted in some success in forcing the municipalities to change their by-laws. The City of Sarnia has removed all by-laws that restrict the proximity of group homes and supported living homes to one another. We are hopeful that through future mediation sessions other municipalities will also agree to amend their by-laws.

Human Rights Application by Graduate Student against University
ARCH is representing a graduate student in her application to the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario against an Ontario university. This application involves the issue of a graduate school’s duty to accommodate graduate students in their capacity as students and employees. 

Jodhan v. The Attorney General of Canada
ARCH has just filed its intervention materials in Jodhan v. The Attorney General of Canada.  This case concerns web accessibility to government information for blind persons.  Dianne Wintermute and Karen Spector are representing the interveners, The Alliance for Equality of Blind Canadians (AEBC).  ARCH will be presenting three arguments on behalf of the AEBC.

First, the AEBC will be arguing that the proper test under the equality guarantees of s.15(1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is the test that the Supreme Court of Canada enunciated in its first equality rights case, Andrews v. The Law Society of British Columbia.  The test under s. 15(1) has had a long evolution, and had become very complicated, which presents additional barriers for equality seeking claimants or groups.  The two step test in Andrews asks:  First, does the law create a distinction based on an enumerated or analogous ground; and second does the law create a disadvantage by perpetuating prejudice or stereotyping.

The second argument is that the equality guarantees under s. 15(1) cannot be diminished by having the government justify its discriminatory actions (if those are proved under s. 15(1)) under s.15(1) itself, but that rather, the government only has resort to justifying its actions under s. 1 of the Charter. The AEBC will argue that any arguments with respect to costs, resources, complex nature of decision making, the need to balance society’s different interests or the need to introduce social programs in an incremental way can only be carried out under section 1 of the Charter.  That is, the Government must demonstrate that an otherwise discriminatory action is justified by law in a free and democratic society.  In other words, the equality seeking claimant has the onus of establishing a breach under s. 15(1).  Then the onus shifts to the government to justify the breach under s. 1 of the Charter.

The final argument that the AEBC will offer to the Court is that the Government’s failure to implement accessible websites constitutes a breach of its obligations under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD).  The Government says it provides information and services in a variety of effective ways including by mail, in person, by telephone, and by fax.  The Government presumes that these methods of providing information and services are equally valid and asserts that (i) internet use is merely a matter of personal preference and (ii) there is no duty at law to accommodate an individual’s personal preferences.  By failing to acknowledge a right to the benefit of internet access, the AEBC will argue that Canada fails to acknowledge any corresponding duty upon them to provide accessible websites which is in direct contravention of the wording and spirit of specific Articles in the CRPD. 

Guardianship Cases 
ARCH was involved in a number of cases involving persons who had been declared incapable of managing property and their guardians for property. In almost all of the cases, problems arose as a consequence of an improvement in the overall condition of the incapable person combined with the unwillingness of the guardian to acknowledge these changes or offer the incapable person an opportunity to participate more fully in making decisions affecting their life. In almost every case, the guardians seemed to have been advised to refuse to co-operate with ARCH, to refuse to acknowledge that ARCH (or anyone) could represent the incapable person and to refuse to offer the incapable person any degree of influence over decisions affecting their lives. In almost every case the fundamental conflict could have been resolved very easily had the guardians followed the provisions of the Substitute Decisions Act, by sharing information with the incapable person and  involving the incapable person in decision making processes to the fullest extent possible. Instead, in case after case, guardians took adversarial stands refusing to comply with the Substitute Decisions Act. In almost every case, the result was a breakdown in a critical family relationship or set of relationships. 

Unfortunately, the court processes available to incapable parties to rectify these situations are complex, time-consuming, and inaccessible and often produce less than satisfactory results. When informed of what would be required to challenge their guardians in court, most clients simply give up. This is a most frustrating situation as vulnerable persons attempt to assert a greater degree of autonomy over their lives. 

Until incapable persons are offered a more streamlined and accessible process to mediate disputes with their guardians for property, incapable persons will always be at a distinct disadvantage, particularly when their guardians have access to the means to oppose the incapable person’s attempts to assert their rights.

Criminal Injuries Compensation
ARCH represented a young woman with disabilities who had suffered multiple forms of abuse at the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board.  She had been taken advantage of by many people, but suffered significant psychological and extreme physical abuse at the hands of two ex-boyfriends.  We were able to secure an extension of the time to file an application at the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board so that she could file a claim.  We produced voluminous evidence of historic abuse through sexual and physical assaults.  We were successful in achieving the maximum award possible under the legislation. 

Community Development

Community Outreach Project
In June 2011, ARCH received special funds from Legal Aid Ontario to hire a Community Outreach Coordinator to facilitate ARCH’s outreach activities in all parts of Ontario.  ARCH’s Outreach Program stems from the 2010-13 Strategic Plan which, was informed by the results of a year-long Needs Assessment.  The Needs Assessment clearly demonstrated that ARCH does not have a meaningful presence in rural and remote Ontario and that many persons with disabilities do not know about ARCH services. The new Outreach Program aims to increase awareness regarding the services that ARCH provides for persons with disabilities, focusing particularly on those who live in isolation.

The funding of this project will help ARCH foster lasting partnerships with the private bar, other community legal clinics, disability organizations, universities, community colleges, and government and non-government agencies to help reach people with disabilities and increase access to justice.  The initiation of new contacts and building on existing relationships will contribute to the development of a comprehensive referral manual specific to the needs of people with disabilities. This will assist ARCH to more effectively support ARCH clients, as well as callers to whom the clinic cannot provide service, by offering more accurate, geographically appropriate, and meaningful referrals.

ARCH will deliver substantive legal information sessions as well as information about ARCH programs in all regions of the province.  These will be recorded and put on our website for future use.  This work will assist ARCH in making full use of the technology available in the most appropriate and accessible ways.

Academic partnerships with universities and community colleges will give ARCH the opportunity to deliver substantive lectures and other forms of course delivery on the rights of people with disabilities in various contexts.  This effort not only aims to increase the knowledge of disability law for law students, but also hopes to inspire students to take up this work, creating a sustainable group of lawyers and other service providers who will represent people with disabilities in the future.

This project will assist ARCH to expand services to remote and rural communities across the province, by giving service providers and people with disabilities the information they need to access ARCH services.  It will also allow ARCH to coordinate our services through new and enhanced partnerships. 

Law Reform Initiatives

ARCH staff participated in several law reform initiatives that included working with coalitions, making written and oral submissions to government committees and government officials. In many instances we see the suggestions made in the ARCH submissions reflected in the changes to legislation and policy. Some of these initiatives undertaken this year include:

Special Services at Home / Passport Campaign
ARCH had observed an alarming and growing trend of people with intellectual disabilities being unable to afford vital supports and services needed to develop independence and to participate in the community. ARCH worked with community partners to collect the stories of individuals with intellectual disabilities and their families from across the province. ARCH began a call for stories and a letter writing campaign during the summer of 2010 as part of advocacy efforts to effect change within the delivery of programs and services for persons with developmental disabilities. ARCH also produced a lobby kit to assist families with their own self-advocacy efforts on this issue. 

In October 2010, ARCH initiated a petition campaign supported by Family Alliance Ontario, People First of Ontario, Community Living Ontario, Special Services At Home Provincial Coalition and the Individualized Funding Coalition for Ontario. The petition speaks to substantially improving Developmental Services by demanding that all qualified Passport and SSAH applicants immediately receive adequate funding; that the application and funding allocation processes be transparent; and that sufficient long-term funding be put into place so that eligible Ontarians with disabilities can access the supports and services they require and deserve.

On April 6th, the Minister of Community and Social Services Madeleine Meilleur announced that this year’s Budget will include an additional $40 million to be allocated to the developmental services sector. Of this amount, $15 million will be allocated to the Passport and Special Services at Home programs that support people who live at home by providing direct financial support. 

ARCH continues to monitor this issue, as well as issues related to the transformation process of the developmental services sector. 

Social Assistance Review
This year, the provincial government appointed the Commission for the Review of Social Assistance in Ontario to review Ontario's social assistance system. The Commission must submit recommendations and an action plan for reforming the system to the Ontario government by June 30, 2012.  The Commission is seeking input from stakeholders and communities in two phases.  The first phase, which ended on September 1, 2011, collected feedback on the Discussion Paper: Issues and Ideas.  The second phase, which will take place later in 2011, will seek input on options and possible approaches to reforming the social assistance system.

The Commission has a significant mandate to make recommendations to the government to reform social assistance in Ontario. As stated by the Commissioners, the mandate includes the “need to build a better system that improves employment opportunities and provides security for people who cannot work”.   The Commissioners have said publicly that the social assistance system in Ontario requires fundamental reform. 

Given the large numbers of persons with disabilities who must turn to social assistance for their support, it is critical that the Commissioners hear from people with disabilities from the perspective of their lived experience.  ARCH made a substantive submission to the Commission in order to raise the issues of concern to the community that we serve.  We consulted with our community and with this input produced submissions to the Commission that included the following concerns on behalf of persons with disabilities:
•	The Commission provides an opportunity to ensure an adequate standard of living for persons with disabilities with low-income;
•	The Commission provides an opportunity to address the need for better training and education supports as well as for better programs to address social inclusion as well as barriers to employment.  
•	Ontario Disability Support Plan (ODSP) benefits should not be made conditional on work, training, volunteering or treatment. 
•	The AODA cannot be solely relied on to remove barriers to employment for people with disabilities. 
•	There should be no distinction between people with disabilities who are “able to work” and those who are “unable to work” 
•	The definition of “disability” may be at risk with the suggestion of a two-tiered system for people with “severe” and “not severe disabilities”. 
The Commissioners have sought our further input on the question of direct funding of benefits to persons with disabilities, which we are pleased to provide.  We look forward to receiving the Commission’s recommendations on options and possible approaches this fall.

AODA Integrated Accessibility Standard
Prior to the government passing the Integrated Accessibility Standard, which incorporates accessibility standards related to employment, information and communications and transportation, as a regulation under the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, ARCH provided comment on the Standard.  ARCH continues to support this important legislation and its purpose to remove barriers and improve accessibility for all Ontarians with disabilities.  We continue to be concerned however that the AODA contains many exemptions and lacks enforcement mechanisms that would ensure that its purpose becomes reality for people with disabilities in our province.

Public Legal Education Activities

ARCH delivered a number of educational sessions to continue our goal to ensure that people with disabilities, and those who represent them, are aware of their rights and are enabled in their enforcement.   The following are examples of some of these sessions delivered during this past year.

Human Rights in Education
ARCH routinely delivers presentations on issues related to public education services for students with disabilities. This summer, ARCH once again participated in the Ready for School Connects Program, delivered by East York East Toronto Family Resources Organization, and provided to schools across two school boards. ARCH delivered 12 workshops to newcomer families on issues related to disability, the Education Act and the Ontario Human Rights Code.

A Selection of Public Legal Education Presentations
ARCH was an active participant at the Canadian Conference for Elder Law this year.  We chaired a workshop on Attendant Services. We also presented at a workshop on the topic of Aging with an Intellectual Disability.

We have provided numerous workshops to the Workplace Essential Skills Program on the topic of Employment, the AODA and Human Rights issues.  We also produced and presented a webinar on these issues.

We organized a webinar that was presented by a private bar lawyer, Brendan Pooran, whose presentation focused on the Disability Tax Credit and the benefits that flow from it.

We provided presentations on our Special Services at Home and Passport Campaign, as well as on the changes to those programs under the new Social Inclusion Act to three different groups.

Attendant Services Fact Sheets
ARCH released a set of six Attendant Services Fact Sheets. These Fact Sheets provide a general overview of the various types of attendant services and how to access them, more detailed descriptions of Community Care Access Center Services, Direct Funding and the various complaints processes as well as information on the Attendant Services Bill of Rights and the Health Services and Appeals Review Board. 

ARCH Alert
ARCH Alert is ARCH’s newsletter. It provides timely information on proposed legislation, major cases, government consultations, community initiatives, and other important disability-related initiatives and developments.  ARCH Alert has a circulation of approximately 3,600 readers. It is distributed to people with disabilities, family members, government officials, disability organizations, the media, ARCH’s member organizations, the community legal clinics in Ontario, lawyers and legal organizations throughout the province and beyond. After the publication of each issue and at many public legal education events, people have expressed their appreciation for the information we provided and for the thorough and relevant content in the newsletter.   We frequently receive requests to reprint articles or post them on websites.  Some of the key issues we covered in this past year were:

•	ARCH Represents Canadian Association for Community Living at the Supreme Court 
•	Court Affirms that Addiction is a Disability for ODSP Benefits
•	Education Matters
•	Court Finds that Federal Government Breaches Equality Rights of People with Disabilities as Websites Are Inaccessible
•	Important Milestone for Social Assistance Announced
•	People First Responds to Bill 83-Protecting Vulnerable People against Picketing Act
•	Law Commission Publishes Research Papers on the Law As It Affects Persons with Disabilities
•	Caledon Institute Proposes Federal Income Plan for Canadians with Severe Disabilities
•	Committee Releases a Report for a Federal Poverty Reduction Plan
•	Canadian Conference on Elder Law
•	International Research on Capacity and Supported Decision Making
•	ARCH Supports Law Foundation’s Connecting Regions Project
•	Mayoral Debates on Equity and Disability Issues
•	ARCH’s Campaign for changes to Developmental Services (SSAH Special Issue)
•	Gary Malkowski Honoured!
•	ARCH’s 30th Anniversary Celebratory Symposium
•	Addressing the Parkdale Violence 
•	Developmental Services Update
•	Recent Reports and Publications 
•	One of the Longest Days
•	Customer Services Standard Not Worth the Paper It’s Printed On!
•	Campaigning for Communication
•	Bill 173 
•	ARCH Participates in Connecting Regions Event  
•	The Other, Other Election
•	Attendant Services Fact Sheets
•	Our Right to Barrier-Free Voting
•	Accessibility during the Federal Election
•	How Are The Federal Political Parties Addressing Issues That Are Important to Persons with Disabilities?

In support of our SSAH and Passport Campaign, we published a special ARCH Alert in January 2011, detailing the issues faced by families, and presenting some families’ stories, as well as providing an update to the community on the issues and ARCH’s efforts to that date.
Highlights of Selected Program Initiatives and Special Programs

ARCH / Law Society of Upper Canada - Access Awareness Event
On June 20, 2011, ARCH and the Law Society of Upper Canada hosted a disability awareness event titled: “UnChartered Territory: Legal Mechanisms beyond the Charter to Advance Disability Rights”. The event was open to members of the legal profession and the community. The panellists presented their experiences with some of the unique ways of advancing the rights of people with disabilities beyond Charter litigation.

Professor Ravi Malhotra explored recent court decisions in equality rights cases that could considerably hamper the original promise of the Charter and the human rights system if such court decisions remain unchallenged. Karen Spector of ARCH spoke about some of the barriers faced by individuals who have been involuntarily detained on a long term basis under the Mental Health Act and how the law reform initiatives that stemmed from her clients’ cases should result in an increase in the oversight role of the Consent and Capacity Board. David Rosenfeld of Koskie Minsky discussed how class actions can advance the rights of persons with disabilities, particularly those who would not traditionally be capable of doing so on their own. Marianna Adams and Andreas Prinz, who are members of the Self-Advocates Drop-In which is a place where people who have been labelled with an intellectual disability regularly gather to support each other in self advocacy, shared creative ways of changing attitudes and educating the public about the value of people with disabilities. The panel was moderated by Laurie Letheren of ARCH. The panel discussion was attended by close to 200 people.

After the panel discussion, we moved to a celebratory reception where Convocation Hall was filled with lively conversation. Laurie Beachell, National Coordinator, Council of Canadians with Disabilities then delivered a key note address about the litigation experiences and challenges of people with disabilities and reminded us to reflect on how much we have achieved together. The very powerful documentary, “Offence Taken” was also screened at the reception.

Connecting Regions
ARCH participated in many activities undertaken by the Connecting Regions Project. The project is funded by the Law Foundation of Ontario and is intended to improve access to legal information and services for low-income persons who either speak a language other than English or who live in rural and remote communities. As part of this project Ed Montigny of ARCH, in co-operation with the Simcoe, Haliburton and Kawartha Lakes Community Legal Clinic, made presentations in Lindsay (October 29), Barrie (December 3) and Haliburton Hills (April 6) offering information on human rights and accommodation for persons with disabilities as well as the obligations of guardians for property and the rights of persons who have been declared incapable. 

Mayoral Debates (Fall 2010)
ARCH partnered with Equity Toronto to organize two public mayoral candidate debates in the weeks before the Toronto municipal elections last fall. One debate focussed on disability issues and was attended by a large number of persons with disabilities. The other debate provided a forum for community members, particularly those from newcomer or visible minority communities, to ask mayoral candidates about their plans to promote diversity, equity and inclusion in Toronto. Both debates were attended by all the main candidates.  Equity Toronto is a coalition of community agencies, including Good Jobs for All, Scadding Court Community Centre, the Social Planning Council and many others. 

Jacobus tenBroek Disability Law Symposium, National Federation of the Blind, Baltimore
ARCH once again sent a representative, Ed Montigny, to the Jacobus tenBroek Disability Law Symposium held in Baltimore at the National Institute for the Blind, April 14-15, 2011.  The theme this year was collaboration and coalition building between various equality seeking groups, such as the civil rights movement, the gay rights movement and the community of persons with disabilities. The conference lived up to its reputation as an exciting and dynamic forum for sharing ideas and experiences and strategies for defending the legal rights of persons with disabilities. The conference offered an opportunity to make valuable contacts with American lawyers and social rights advocates. 

Attendance at the Symposium facilitated follow up with the contacts established in Baltimore  when the American Bar Association met in Toronto in August 2011. ARCH was privileged to be invited to some of the American Bar Association events. Staff attended a seminar on Aging with a Disability, focussed on international capacity tests, and how one can best support an aging person whose capacity may be called into question.

Disability Law Celebratory Symposium
ARCH celebrated its 30th anniversary by hosting a disability law symposium on December 13, 2010.  The day was marked by presentations by disability activists, lawyers, researchers and advocates. The panels covered a wide range of issues affecting people with disabilities such as the impact of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), the intersection of poverty and disability, emerging issues in legal capacity and guardianship, the engagement and inclusion of people with disabilities in the political process and access to justice for people with disabilities. 

In his introductory remarks, Peter Wells, President of ARCH’s Board of Directors,  encouraged all of us to take the insights learned from the symposium in the hopes of becoming “agents for change” in the disability rights movement. Rita Sampson from Disability Rights Promotion International discussed the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, an important tool for advocates to use in creating change within the law as well as setting international standards for governments to follow. 

In the first panel, lawyers Diane Wintermute, Lesli Bisgould and Laurie Letheren, presented on separate issues related to s. 15 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the equality provisions). Each presentation gave a separate analysis of the legal cases addressing the equality provisions, the context of these cases and the legal barriers currently facing people with disabilities.  The second panel, which included Pat Capponi, Janet Mosher, Cameron Crawford, Marian MacGregor, discussed their experience and research on the intersection of poverty and disability. The presentations suggested that other factors such as race, gender, education, and age often affected the experience of people with disabilities living in poverty. 

The third panel consisted of lawyers and advocates, Marshall Swadron, Michael Bach, Jane Martin and Tess Sheldon. The entire audience was able to get involved in the hypothetical case scenarios which addressed capacity and guardianship issues among people with mental health disabilities. These scenarios were given to both the audience and the panelists. Based on their own experience advocating on behalf of people with mental health disabilities, the panelists answered the questions about the situations that were described. 

The fourth panel consisting of Michael Prince, John Rae and Gary Malkowski discussed the social policy reforms and the outreach efforts by election offices across Canada that have focused on engaging people with disabilities in the election processes. Sandi Bell, past ARCH Board member and disability activist gave her concluding remarks. Through a personal narrative, she shared her views on obtaining access to justice for all. 

Increasing Access to Legal Services for Ontario’s Deaf Low-Income Communities
ARCH is very pleased to have been selected as a partner with the Canadian Hearing Society on a Law Foundation of Ontario sponsored project to increase access to community legal clinic services for Deaf low- income communities. 

This pilot project will increase access to legal services for Deaf communities by installing video conferencing capabilities that will access video remote interpreting services, in two community legal clinics, including ARCH; using traditional on-site interpreting services in one community legal clinic, enabling the Canadian Hearing Society to document, compare and make recommendations on the best use of interpreters in community legal clinics; and, will provide cultural training to legal clinic staff and general legal training to CHS General Support Service counsellors. 

The video conferencing equipment will be installed at ARCH later in the fall.

Osgoode Hall Law School Disability Intensive Program
ARCH is also very pleased to have been selected for partnership with Osgoode Hall Law School to develop a clinical intensive program in the area of disability law. The clinical intensive program will nurture a new generation of lawyers to take on the practice of disability law, an area in which there is a dearth of practitioners. ARCH’s capacity to provide legal services will be increased by the students who are placed in our community legal clinic. The disability community will benefit by this increased capacity which we see as resulting in better access to justice for people with disabilities. In ARCH’s Strategic Plan for 2010-2013, we identified the strategic goals of working with academic programs to develop future practitioners in this field of law as well as to develop scholarly work on delivering legal services to people with disabilities.  The clinic intensive program will assist ARCH to achieve both goals. 

ARCH looks forward to welcoming our first “crop” of students in 2013.

ARCH Library
Again, thanks to the support of the Law Foundation of Ontario, ARCH has been able to hire a law librarian to organize, scan, and re-catalogue our current and archival collection.  Currently, the library is catalogued using a unique coding system.  Our librarian, Mary Hanson, who has assisted our sister clinic Injured Workers’ Consultants in a similar project, has begun this important project and is organizing and cataloguing the library onto a database which will allow it to be searchable using a subject index developed by our lawyers.  Once the collection is reclassified and entered into the database, it will be physically rearranged.  We would also like to scan (with the publisher’s permission) our extensive subject files.  These are mainly comprised of papers, newspaper clippings, and articles chronicling the disability movement over the last 30 years.   Our plan is to be able to find this valuable information with ease so as to support our work and to provide the information to the community.
Collaborative Work

ARCH staff participate in a number of committees on an ongoing basis throughout the year.  These include committees of community groups, legal aid clinics, Legal Aid Ontario, the Law Society of Upper Canada and government. The work of all of these committees is to advance access to justice for the poor in Ontario and to ensure their voices are heard by governors, policy and decision makers. Examples of these committees on which ARCH staff participated during the year include: 

Law Society of Upper Canada’s Equity Advisory Group [EAG], 
Ontario Disability Support Plan Action Coalition,
Ontario Disability Support Plan Access Committee,
Clinic Human Rights Working Group,
Knowledge Management Group, 
Lawyers & Community Legal Workers New to the Clinic System,
Toronto Legal Clinic Management Group,
Toronto Support Staff Association,
Ontario Legal Clinics’ Network on Workers’ Compensation

As a result of our SSAH and Passport Campaign, ARCH staff participated in the SSAH Provincial Coalition.  We will continue to work with this very important group of families and organizations to ensure that young people and their families receive the benefits to which they are entitled.

ARCH also participates in a committee of the Centre for Independent Living in Toronto that is considering the issue of Aging with a Mobility Disability, and will continue to do so in the coming year.  This project, coupled with the information we presented at the Canadian Conference on Elder Law will assist us in gaining a better understanding of the issues facing some communities of people with disabilities as they age, and may help to inform some of the other work we do.

ARCH also has a seat on the Director’s Review Committee for the Office of the Independent Police Review Commission, to ensure that the voice of people with disabilities is heard during the review process.

We are also working with the Peel Police, and the Canadian Hearing Society to draft a protocol for police to use when dealing with Deaf, deafened or hard of hearing persons.  We expect that there will be police and community training sessions once the protocol is adopted. 

ARCH’s Work on Interclinic Workgroups
ARCH has been very active with the ODSP Action Coalition Policy Committee this year, and has participated in the drafting of two submissions to the Social Assistance Review Commission.  We are waiting for the Commissioners’ Options report, which is due to be released this fall.  We intend to conduct another round of community consultations to inform our submissions to the Commissioner’s Report.

Association of Community Legal Clinics of Ontario
ARCH remains an active member of the Association of Committee Legal Clinics of Ontario and is represented on the ACLCO’s executive.  This work focuses on ensuring the continued vitality of Ontario’s poverty law services.  The ACLCO has focused this year and last on bringing the voice of community legal clinics to its funder, Legal Aid Ontario, and to the Ministry of the Attorney General as plans are formulated to transform legal aid in Ontario. Specifically, the ACLCO has commenced a Strategic Planning Process for the clinic system, has participated in facilitated meetings to achieve better collaboration with LAO. During a time of governmental restraint, the ACLCO continues to work to ensure the fundamental principles of clinics as independent, community based and governed organizations, providing a broad range of poverty law services, receiving secure core funding to do our work, and working together as a provincial system.

ARCH Funders 

Legal Aid Ontario
The Board of Directors of ARCH wishes to acknowledge the on-going support of Legal Aid Ontario (LAO), ARCH’s primary funder.  Clinics are at the forefront of urging LAO to undertake initiatives that will enhance and broaden the reach of the delivery of legal services, particularly to those in marginalized and isolated communities.

ARCH has received additional funding this year from LAO’s Client Service Coordination Fund to fund our Community Outreach Coordinator.  The project is described earlier in this report.

Additional Funders
The City of Toronto has once again provided ARCH with a Community Service Partnership Grant that supports our education, information and referral program, for which we are appreciative. These funds enable ARCH to employ administrative staff not funded by Legal Aid Ontario. 
The Law Foundation of Ontario has provided ARCH with a grant to Reorganize and Recatalogue our library collection.  We have hired a librarian who is taking on the task.  We expect the project to be completed by January of 2012,

ARCH is also licensed by the Ontario Lottery Corporation to participate in the Break Open Ticket program.  Receipts from this initiative support our information/referral services, library purchases, disability accommodation, and staff training. 

We received funds from Human Resources and Skills Development’s Summer Career Placement Program to hire a summer law student. 

ARCH Staff 

ARCH has a staffing complement of twelve positions.  As our primary funder, LAO provides our operating and on-going personnel funds.  We are able to fill 10.5 positions with LAO funds: the executive director (who is also a lawyer); the office manager; five staff lawyers; an intake and referral worker; a community outreach coordinator and 1.5 support staff. 

ARCH raises funds through various sources from year to year that fund half the cost of an administrative staff as well as a librarian. 

Non-permanent staff include law students who work with us in the summer or on a pro bono basis throughout the year.  ARCH also contracts individuals from time to time to work on specific projects.

Contributors to ARCH’s Work:  Students, Lawyers and Volunteers

During 2010 and 2011 law students have expressed a great deal of interest in working with ARCH in various capacities. Pro bono law students, summer students and articling students have greatly enhanced our work. They bring talent, energy and commitment to the work of ARCH, as well as humour and fun to the office.  Additionally, ARCH is very appreciative of the support of the private bar and the pro bono assistance of lawyers and law students provided to ARCH itself, and to our clients.  ARCH is also appreciative of the support of volunteers and professionals who have provided ongoing general support or offered us specific insight and information that has advanced our work. 

ARCH gratefully acknowledges the contributions of the following people and organizations:

•	Joseph Sussman, Law Student
•	Saron Ghebressellassie, Law Student
•	Sarah Emery, Student-at-Law
•	Lorne Sossin
•	Ena Chadha
•	Cynthia Wilkey
•	Lesli Bisgould
•	John McKinnon
•	Kenn Hale

IVANA PETRICONE 
Executive Director

ARCH Staff List

Staff and Position
Ivana Petricone , Executive Director 
Amanda Ward , Information/Referral Worker
Denise De Campos (contract), Community Outreach Coordinator
Dianne Wintermute , Staff Lawyer
Doreen Way , Office Manager
Ed Montigny , Staff Lawyer
Kerri Joffe (on leave), Staff Lawyer
Laurie Letheren, Staff Lawyer
Mary Hanson (contract), Librarian 
Robert Lattanzio, Staff Lawyer 
Tess Sheldon (contract), Staff Lawyer
Karen Spector (contract), Staff Lawyer
Theresa Sciberras, Program and Litigation Assistant
Yangtzee Tamang, Operations and Litigation Assistant

A Special Thanks to This Year's Supporters

Legal Aid Ontario
Alcohol and Gaming Commission (through Break Open Ticket Sales)
Blake Cassels and Graydon LLP
City of Toronto - Community Services Grants Program
City of Toronto - Access and Equity Program
Human Resources and Social Development Canada 	www.hrsdc.gc.ca  
Law Commission of Ontario
Law Foundation of Ontario
Law Society of Upper Canada - Equity Department
Osgoode Hall Law School – York University
Pro Bono Students Canada

And all individual donors - Thank You!