Fair Registration Practices Report

Early Childhood Educators (2016)

The answers seen below were submitted to the OFC by the regulated professions.

This Fair Registration Practices Report was produced as required by:

  • the Fair Access to Regulated Professions and Compulsory Trades Act (FARPACTA) s. 20 and 23(1), for regulated professions named in Schedule 1 of FARPACTA
  • the Health Professions Procedural Code set out in Schedule 2 of the Regulated Health Professions Act (RHPA) s. 22.7 (1) and 22.9(1), for health colleges.

Index

  1. Qualitative Information
  2. Quantitative Information
  3. Submission

1. Qualitative Information

a) Requirements for registration, including acceptable alternatives
i. Describe any improvements / changes implemented in the last year.

The specific requirements for registration remained the same as in previous years. However, for some requirements, changes were made to policies and/or procedures.

 

With respect to changes in policy and procedures for the individual assessment of educational qualifications, see the response to question 1(b).

 

With respect to changes in policies and/or procedures for certain other registration requirements, see the response to question 1(f).

 

ii. Describe the impact of the improvements / changes on applicants.

With respect to changes in policy and procedures for the individual assessment of educational qualifications, see the response to question 1(b).

 

With respect to changes in policies and/or procedures for certain other registration requirements, see the response to question 1(f).

 

iii. Describe the impact of the improvements / changes on your organization.

With respect to changes in policy and procedures for the individual assessment of educational qualifications, see the response to question 1(b).

 

With respect to changes in policies and/or procedures for certain other registration requirements, see the response to question 1(f).

 

b) Assessment of qualifications
i. Describe any improvements / changes implemented in the last year.

In June 2016, Council approved a revised policy to guide the College’s procedure for the individual assessment (IA) of education qualifications. The IA procedure applies to applicants other than those who obtained an early childhood education (ECE) diploma from an Ontario College of Applied Arts and Technology (OCAAT), who obtained an ECE diploma or degree from a Canadian post-secondary institution approved by the College, or who apply on the basis of their equivalency certificate from the Association of Early Childhood Educators of Ontario (AECEO) / Association francophone à l’éducation des services à l’enfance de ‘lOntario (Aféseo) or under the Agreement on Internal Trade (AIT).

 

  • The policy was updated to align with the standard for the education requirement for registration.

 

The College’s Registration Regulation (specifically, s. 7.1.i. of O. Reg. 221/08) sets the OCAAT ECE diploma program as the standard for the education requirement for registration. Currently, OCAAT ECE diploma programs must comply with the 2012 Early Childhood Education Program Standard, as approved by the Ministry of Training, Colleges, and Universities (now the Ministry of Advanced Education and Skills Development).

 

Under the College’s previous policy for the IA procedure, the College used the 2000 Early Childhood Education Program Standard. The alignment of the policy to the 2012 Early Childhood Education Program Standard resulted in:

  • an expansion of the vocational learning outcomes being assessed for (i.e., from 9 to 10 outcomes), as well as the elements of performance for each vocational learning outcome.
  • the inclusion of essential employability skills (EES) components.

 

  • The revisions also provided more clarity regarding:
    • the level of credential required (i.e., diploma at minimum),
    • the recognition of international institutions (i.e., the academic institution must be recognized in its own jurisdiction and authorized to grant diplomas or degrees in its own jurisdiction, and if outside of Canada, evaluated by World Education Services as recognized in Canada),
    • details with respect to work experience for the purposes of an applicant meeting the practicum component of the education requirement, and
    • type of documents required to complete the assessment.

 

With the revised policy approved by Council, the College introduced a new two-phased IA procedure in September/October 2016.

 

  • Phase 1 of the IA procedure is to determine whether an applicant’s education program meets the minimum educational requirements (i.e., program completion, program duration, and institution status), which are aligned with the Ministry of Advanced Education and Skills Development’s qualifications for a two-year diploma.

 

  • Phase 2 of the IA procedure involves an assessment of the applicant’s education and work experience to determine if they meet the education requirement for registration. The specific criteria that must be evident in the applicant’s education and work experience are outlined in the revised policy. It is during Phase 2 when applicants are required to provide supporting documentation for the education and experience they completed.

 

The revised IA policy and new procedures also enhanced requirements related to the documentation to be provided in Phase 2 in order to ensure that an applicant’s education and experience can be properly assessed.

 

  • A detailed course outline must be provided for each course completed in the program(s) under assessment. Previously, only a short course description had to be submitted, but these were found to be too limited in the information provided to ensure that applicants have the most accurate assessment possible.

 

  • To validate an applicant’s work experience for the purpose of meeting the practicum component of the education requirement, the College developed a form to be completed and submitted directly by a qualified educator(s) who supervised the work experience. Given the form’s structure, more focused, relevant, and accurate evidence of work experience can be provided. Previously, general letters of reference were provided that were often written as character references with limited information about the actual work completed.  The College continues to accept practicum experience, for the purpose of meeting the practicum component of the education requirement, regardless of what country it is obtained in.

 

  • The applicant is to complete and submit a self-assessment of their educational qualifications. The applicant reviews their education and identifies how they believe their education meets the vocational learning outcomes. The self-assessment is taken into consideration by the College, but is not binding on the College.

 

ii. Describe the impact of the improvements / changes on applicants.

Revisions to the policy and procedures enhance transparency regarding the IA process.

 

  • More specific language is used in the policy to help applicants make informed decisions about whether their education and work experience could potentially meet the education requirement for registration.

 

  • The self-assessment component clearly sets out the criteria the College uses to assess applicants’ education. This clarity facilitates applicants’ understanding of the IA process and how the College determines which criteria are met or not met in the applicant’s education.

 

  • Flow charts are also included in the College’s application guide about the IA process to assist:
    • prospective applicants to self-assess whether they meet the minimum educational requirements.
    • applicants understand the IA process itself and key decision points and associated outcomes

 

Revisions to the policy and procedures ensure fairness to all applicants.

 

  • The College’s Registration Regulation explicitly states that for applicants (who undergo the individual assessment) to meet the education requirement for registration, the IA process must determine that their education and work experience is at least equivalent to that required by an OCAAT ECE diploma program. With the use of the 2012 Early Childhood Education Program Standard (instead of the previous standard established in 2000) in the IA policy, applicants who undergo the individual assessment are held to the same educational standard as current graduates of OCAAT ECE diploma programs. 

 

  • The change to using the 2012 standard means that applicants’ education is now assessed using 10, rather than 9, vocational learning outcomes. Thus, applicants have an additional criterion to meet in order to be successful in the IA process. The College may experience a decrease in the number of applicants who meet the education requirement under the IA process because of the updated standards.

 

Revisions to the policy and procedures may affect timelines and costs for applicants in the IA process.

 

  • For some applicants, the two-phased approach will shorten timelines and reduce costs. Some applicants apply to the College with education that does not meet the minimum educational requirements. These applicants will be notified at the end of Phase 1 that they do not meet the education requirement for registration. Previously, these applicants would have had to collect and provide all documentation for the individual assessment, and incur costs for collecting and translating documents where required, even though their education did not meet minimum requirements.

 

  • For applicants whose education meets the minimum requirements and who proceed to Phase 2 of the IA process, there is potential for timelines to increase depending on the time it takes to gather the necessary documents for their education to be assessed and work experience to be validated under the new process. There may or may not be any impact on costs to applicants in these circumstances depending on the documentation they provide. As under the previous policy, these applicants are required to provide documents for their education to be assessed; however, detailed course outlines are now required rather than short course descriptions. 
iii. Describe the impact of the improvements / changes on your organization.

While the implementation of the new IA policy and procedures is still in its early stages, the College foresees that prospective applicants will be better able to self-assess whether they have the minimum education requirements (e.g., credential in ECE) to make it worthwhile to apply to the College. There may be a decrease in the number of individuals who apply under the IA process overall, but the College anticipates an increase in the number of individuals who are able to proceed through the entire IA process because they apply with educational qualifications that meet the minimum expectations.

 

The enhanced rigour applied to IA procedures has also contributed to improved consistency in assessments and decision-making.

 

As well, with improved transparency about the new IA policy and procedures, applicants who are assessed as not meeting the education requirement for registration, will have a greater understanding of the IA criteria and assessment procedures, which will allow them to make a more informed decision about whether to request a review by the Registration Appeals Committee.  This may reduce the number of unsuccessful requests for review.

 

c) Provision of timely decisions, responses, and reasons
i. Describe any improvements / changes implemented in the last year.

The following changes were implemented with respect to the work of the Registration Appeals Committee.

 

  • Independent legal counsel provided committee members with training in decision- and reason-writing.

 

  • Independent legal counsel attends committee deliberations to answer any legal questions the committee may have.

 

ii. Describe the impact of the improvements / changes on applicants.

The changes enhanced:

 

  • Clarity in the Registration Appeals Committee’s written decision and reasons communicated to an applicant.

 

  • Consistency in decision-making because independent legal counsel is a neutral third party to the committee’s proceedings.

 

iii. Describe the impact of the improvements / changes on your organization.

The changes streamlined committee deliberations, thereby enabling the Registration Appeals Committee to review more files at each meeting. Files are addressed sooner by the committee than in the past.

 

d) Fees
i. Describe any improvements / changes implemented in the last year.

A new Registration Review Fee of $75 came into effect on January 1, 2016 for applicants who request a review through the registration appeals process.

 

  • Previously, no fee was charged, which meant that College members were subsidizing costs associated with the Registration Appeals Committee.

 

The establishment of such a fee was included in recommendations made in the external review of the College’s statutory committees in 2015. The external review indicated that such a fee would not be established as a deterrent, but rather as a trigger to encourage applicants to thoughtfully consider whether they wanted to proceed with a review of their application by the Registration Appeals Committee.

 

ii. Describe the impact of the improvements / changes on applicants.

The Registration Review Fee only applies to any applicant who submits a request for review of their application by the Registration Appeals Committee. The fee applies equally to all applicants who request a review, regardless of the basis of their request (i.e., it is not limited to internationally-educated applicants or applicants who undergo the College’s process for the individual assessment of their educational qualifications).

 

iii. Describe the impact of the improvements / changes on your organization.

There has been a decrease in the number of applicants requesting a review of their application by the Registration Appeals Committee. However, applicants that request a review of their application are making the effort to prepare and put forward a full, thoughtful submission (e.g., providing additional information about course work to support a review related to the education requirement for registration).

 

e) Timelines
i. Describe any improvements / changes implemented in the last year.

No changes in the reported year.

 

Near the end of 2016, however, the College started to implement a plan to reduce the time limit for applications to remain open with the College. Previously, applicants were permitted to keep applications open without any activity for two years. The College is working to reduce this timeframe to six months.

 

  • The intent of this change is to prevent applicants from keeping an application open with the College for an extended period of time without a reasonable commitment to obtaining the necessary supporting documents to complete their application.

 

  • The change in practice is only intended for applicants who do not demonstrate follow-through in the application process. Applicants, who demonstrate continued engagement in the application process but for whom the process happens to take more than six months, will not have their applications closed.

 

  • The change in practice is intended to encourage applicants to consider the requirements for registration in advance and prepare supporting documentation accordingly. When applicants are prepared and engage in the process, College staff will not need to dedicate as much time to pursuing inactive, abandoned files.

 

ii. Describe the impact of the improvements / changes on applicants.

The College is in the process of implementing the change. Therefore, it is too early to comment on the impact for applicants.

iii. Describe the impact of the improvements / changes on your organization.

The College is in the process of implementing the change. Therefore, it is too early to comment on the impact for the College.

 

f) Policies, procedures and/or processes, including by-laws
i. Describe any improvements / changes implemented in the last year.

With respect to changes in policy and procedures for the individual assessment of educational qualifications, see the response to question 1(b).

 

Policy regarding Language Fluency (revised policy approved by Council in June 2016)

 

  • The College revised its Policy regarding Language Fluency because of various limitations with the Canadian Language Benchmarks (CLB) test and in order to increase the language test options for applicants that could be completed outside of Canada. It replaced recognition of the CLB test with several standardized language proficiency tests, specifically IELTS (Academic), TOEFL (IBT), CanTest, and TESTCan (French). The changes were considered consistent with the language tests recognized by many other regulators and post-secondary institutions in Ontario.

 

  • These policy revisions did not change the standard of language proficiency to be demonstrated by an applicant to meet the language proficiency requirement for registration.

 

Policy regarding Unavailable Documents (a new policy approved by Council in June 2016)

 

  • The policy formalized the College’s practices for accommodating applicants who could not provide original, official educational documents for reasons beyond their control (e.g., post-secondary school closure, risk of harm to the applicant to obtain documents, etc.). It sets out the criteria and procedure whereby the College can accept alternative documentation while still allowing for a meaningful assessment of an applicant’s program of study.

 

With respect to the registration requirements related to conduct:

 

  • Five questions were added to the list of questions applicants must answer in the Declaration of Conduct section of the application form. The questions relate to past or present conduct and the information is used by the College in the determination of whether an applicant meets the requirements for registration related to conduct. The questions are consistent with those asked by other profession-based regulators in Ontario and with the Ministry of Education’s expectations of the early childhood education sector specifically.

 

The College initiated and continues to proceed with an update of all of its application and membership renewal forms to include the additional questions related to professional conduct.

 

With respect to the registration requirement to be eligible to work in the profession:

 

  • The Registration Regulation (i.e., O. Reg. 221/08 under the Early Childhood Educators Act, 2007), requires that applicants must provide evidence of eligibility to work in the ECE profession in Canada. The regulation specifies that such evidence must be in the form of Canadian citizenship, permanent residency in Canada, or a valid work permit under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (Canada).

 

  • In February/March 2016, the College implemented a new procedure for applicants who provide a work permit, under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (Canada), as evidence of eligibility to work in the profession in Canada.

 

  • Applicants in these circumstances, who meet all of the requirements for registration, are issued a Certificate of Registration with a term, condition, and limitation (TCL) imposed to indicate that their Certificate of Registration will expire at the expiry date of their work permit, unless they provide evidence of continued eligibility to work in the profession in Canada, as required by the College’s Registration Regulation.

 

  • Under the College’s new procedure, these applicants have the opportunity on the application form to consent to the imposition of this TCL. Previously, applicants were not given this opportunity to consent upfront, but rather, towards the end of the application process, were issued a Proposal to Impose Terms, Conditions, or Limitations. If applicants do not consent to the imposition of the TCL on the application form, the College will issue a Proposal to Impose Terms, Conditions, or Limitations as per its previous procedure. In any case, the applicant has the right to request a review by the Registration Appeals Committee if they do not consent to the proposal.

 

  • Applicants who become members in these circumstances will have the TCL removed from their Certificate of Registration if they provide evidence of permanent eligibility to work in Canada (i.e., proof of permanent residency or Canadian citizenship).

 

With respect to the submission of application forms:

 

  • As of October 2016, applicants can submit their application form by fax, e-mail, or mail. They are no longer required to submit their application by mail only.

 

  • An original signature written in ink by hand is no longer required. Applicants may now type or print their name and check the signature box to acknowledge that the information in their application is true.

 

ii. Describe the impact of the improvements / changes on applicants.

With respect to changes in policy and procedures for the individual assessment of educational qualifications, see the response to question 1(b).

 

Policy regarding Language Fluency

 

  • Applicants have more options for meeting the language proficiency requirement for registration.

 

  • The tests recognized under the revised policy are widely recognized and available in many other countries. As such, applicants may have already taken the test as a requirement for application to a post-secondary institution, or another regulatory body, which may eliminate the need to repeat the test.

 

  • Applicants, who submit results from one of the language proficiency tests the College recognizes, must still meet the minimum scores required by the College and ensure that the two-year validity period (established by the test developers) has not expired.

 

Policy regarding Unavailable Documents

 

  • Applicants, who are unable (for reasons beyond their control) to obtain the documents required for an individual assessment of their educational qualifications, have opportunity to provide the College with alternative documentation.

 

  • As with the other policies, this policy is posted on the College’s website in English and French to ensure that applicants have easy access to the information and options for these circumstances.

 

With respect to the registration requirements related to conduct:

 

  • Applicants are to answer five additional questions pertaining to their past or present conduct in Ontario and other jurisdictions. Depending on the answers provided, and any follow-up supporting documentation, there may be an impact on an applicant’s eligibility for registration. Consistent with College practices, each applicant’s responses and circumstances are reviewed and considered on an individual basis, and in accordance with fair process principles.

 

With respect to the registration requirement to be eligible to work in the profession:

 

  • By modifying the application form to obtain the applicant’s consent to the imposition of a TCL related to their work permit, there is improved efficiency and timeliness in the application process (when applicants consent to the TCL), as it eliminates the need to issue a Proposal to Issue Terms, Conditions, and Limitations in relation to the work permit specifically.

 

With respect to the submission of application forms:

 

  • Applicants have more convenient, cost-effective options for faster submission of their application to the College (i.e., by e-mail or fax, in addition to mail). They also have multiple options for confirming that the information provided in their application is true.

 

iii. Describe the impact of the improvements / changes on your organization.

With respect to changes in policy and procedures for the individual assessment of educational qualifications, see the response to question 1(b).

 

Policy regarding Language Fluency

 

  • The tests that are recognized under the revised policy have mechanisms to securely submit the applicants’ results to the College. Since results can be sent directly from the testing centre and verified online, the College can be assured of their accuracy and authenticity.

 

Policy regarding Unavailable Documents

 

  • College staff and Registration Appeal Committee members have common guidelines for addressing circumstances where an applicant does not have original documents.

 

  • College staff can use the policy as a resource to readily answer applicants’ questions about their options when they are not able to obtain original documents. As a result, customer service is improved.

 

With respect to the registration requirements related to conduct:

 

  • The additional questions provide the College with further assurances that applicants meet the conduct requirements for registration. Such assurances are important and necessary given the College’s mandate to serve the public interest and protect the public from harm. They also elicit information that is relevant to the current context of practising the early childhood education profession in Ontario.

 

With respect to the registration requirement to be eligible to work in the profession:

 

  • It is too early to comment on the impact for the College.

 

With respect to the submission of application forms:

 

  • By introducing several options for applicants to sign their application form (i.e., confirm that the information in their application is true), there has been a decrease in the number of applications submitted without a signature. The College can more expeditiously facilitate the application process when all parts of the application form, including the signature field, are complete.

 

g) Resources for applicants
i. Describe any improvements / changes implemented in the last year.

The following changes were made to resources about the College’s process for the individual assessment (IA) of educational qualifications.

 

  • In October 2016, the Application Guide for Canadian and Internationally Trained Applicants Requiring an Individual Assessment of their Educational Qualifications was redesigned to provide more comprehensive information regarding the individual assessment procedure and documents required.  Flowcharts were also added to provide quick visual summaries of the information.

 

  • The Individual Assessment (IA) Application Form was updated to correspond with the new IA procedure as outlined in the IA Application Guide.

 

  • The IA page on the College’s website was improved so that all documents pertaining to the IA procedure (including policies) are located on one page for easier access.

 

  • The IA FAQs, as posted on the College’s website, were modified to align with the changes made to the IA procedure.

 

The following changes were made to the College’s website overall, including the section designed for applicants.

 

  • In June 2016, the College’s website was modified to improve compatibility with tablets and smartphones.

 

Other changes related to resources include the following.

 

  • The College, in collaboration with Global Experience Ontario (GEO), drafted updates to the Career Map for Internationally Educated Early Childhood Educators.  This work remains in progress and it will be up to the determination of GEO as to when the updated document will be available.

 

ii. Describe the impact of the improvements / changes on applicants.

The clarity of information provided in the resources was enhanced. Applicants are better able to understand what is required of them.

 

The changes, particularly to the College’s website, make resources and information more accessible to applicants.

 

iii. Describe the impact of the improvements / changes on your organization.

When applicants are better informed, the volume of inquiries to the College for routine information is likely to decrease.

 

h) Review or appeal processes
i. Describe any improvements / changes implemented in the last year.

With respect to documents:

 

  • In previous years, when an applicant submitted a written request for a review by the Registration Appeals Committee, the College sent two letters to the applicant. The first letter indicated receipt of the applicant’s request. The second letter followed with photocopies of every document in the College’s file for the applicant.

 

  • In 2016, the College only sent the applicant one letter, which confirmed receipt of the applicant’s request for review and included a list of the documents the College has in the applicant’s file with respect to the applicant. The intent of this change was to reduce the number of duplicate documents sent to applicants. Applicants are still able to request additional copies of the documents held in their file.

 

With respect to fees, see the response to question 1(d).

 

ii. Describe the impact of the improvements / changes on applicants.

With respect to documents:

 

  • The process is more transparent. Applicants are clearly informed of the documents that the Registration Appeals Committee will be considering during the review of their application.

 

  • The process is more efficient. Applicants receive information sooner and are not provided with copies of documents they already have in their possession. Applicants may also find the process less intimidating because they are not overwhelmed with extra documents.

 

With respect to fees, see the response to question 1(d).

 

iii. Describe the impact of the improvements / changes on your organization.

With respect to documents:

 

  • The process is more streamlined, enabling staff to process requests for review more efficiently. As a result, applicants receive information, related to their request, sooner.

 

  • The process also mitigates the risks of misplacing documents while photocopying files, especially larger files.

 

With respect to fees, see the response to question 1(d).

 

i) Access to applicant records
i. Describe any improvements / changes implemented in the last year.

No changes this year

ii. Describe the impact of the improvements / changes on applicants.

No changes this year

iii. Describe the impact of the improvements / changes on your organization.

No changes this year

j) Training and resources for registration staff, Council, and committee members
i. Describe any improvements / changes implemented in the last year.

Consistent with previous years, Council, committee members, and staff participated in numerous training opportunities throughout the year. Below is a list of the training opportunities provided in 2016 specifically.

 

Training for the Registration Committee:

  • Registration requirements (i.e., applicable legislation and College policies)
  • OFC Learning Module 1 – Understanding Fair-Access Law
  • Policy development role of the Registration Committee (this training was provided in response to a recommendation from the review of non-statutory committees):
    • the role of the Registration Committee in the policy development process,
    • the identification, declaration, and handling of conflicts of interest among committee members, and
    • types of considerations in deliberations and prioritization of activities.         
  • Stakeholder engagement (including the purposes and benefits of stakeholder engagement, how engagement is used in the policy development cycle, a model of the spectrum of engagement, commonly used engagement mechanisms, etc.)

 

Training for the Registration Appeals Committee:

  • Legislation related to registration and the registration appeals process
  • Fair registration principles and practices considerations
  • The College’s revised policy and procedures for individual assessment of educational qualifications
  • Labour mobility
  • Conflicts of interest/bias
  • Human rights issues
  • Decision writing

 

Training for Council:

  • Legal briefing on regulations under the Early Childhood Educators Act – provided by WeirFoulds LLP
  • Diversity, Inclusivity and Innate Bias – provided by Sandeep Tatla, Chief Diversity Officer, Ontario College of Trades
  • Risk Management for Regulators – provided by Steinecke Maciura LeBlanc
  • Report of the Review of the Non-Statutory Committees – provided by Steinecke Maciura LeBlanc
  • Council and Committee Composition - Skills and Competencies – provided by Deanna Williams, Dundee Consulting

 

Training for staff:

  • Risk-based Regulation in an Era of Transparency – provided by WeirFoulds LLP
  • Title Protection and Discipline Orders in the Transparency Era – provided by WeirFoulds LLP
  • Talk isn’t Cheap: The high-stakes question of assessing professional communication competence in our regulatory context – provided by CNAR’s Community of Interest on Language Proficiency in the Regulatory Context
  • 2016 CNAR Annual Conference – provided by CNAR
  • Managing Cultural Differences – provided by ORAC
  • Working with Difficult Clients – provided by Corey Atkinson, Dimensions of Leadership
  • Don’t Let Angry Customers Kill your business:  Turn Detractors into Promoters - provided by QuestionPro
  • Applying the Road to Relevance Model – provided by CSAE
  • Navigating tough performance management challenges and termination decisions – provided by CSAE
  • Executive Leadership For Regulators Program – provided by CLEAR
  • CLEAR’s Annual Educational Conference – provided by CLEAR
  • A Framework for Evidence-Based Decision Making in the OPS – provided by the Office of the Treasury Board
  • Assessing Refugee Qualifications workshop – sponsored by the Canadian Information Centre for International Credentials (CICIC)
  • Refugee Crisis and Non-Verifiable Documents e-learning session – held by Educational Credential Evaluators Inc.

 

Staff also actively participated in the following regulatory networks:

  • Ontario Regulators for Access Consortium (ORAC)
  • Ontario Profession Regulators’ Policy Network (OPRPN)
  • Regulatory Communicators’ Network

 

ii. Describe the impact of the improvements / changes on applicants.

Through such training the College:

 

  • sustains its focus on providing transparent, objective, impartial, and fair registration practices for applicants, within the context of its mandate to protect the public interest.

 

  • develops and demonstrates a commitment to review and improve policies and procedures for applicants.

 

  • remains current with regulatory trends, developments in the broader public sector, and changes in the early childhood education sector and broader community.

 

 

iii. Describe the impact of the improvements / changes on your organization.

Such continuous learning and training helps the College to better understand the current issues that may impact an applicant’s experience during the application process.

 

k) Mutual recognition agreements
i. Describe any improvements / changes implemented in the last year.

No changes this year

ii. Describe the impact of the improvements / changes on applicants.

No changes this year

iii. Describe the impact of the improvements / changes on your organization.

No changes this year

l) Other (include as many items as applicable)
i. Describe any improvements / changes implemented in the last year.

At the start of 2016, the Deputy Registrar role was moved from the College’s Registration and Member Services Department to the Office of the Registrar. The Deputy Registrar role, like the Registrar role, includes all of the statutory responsibilities outlined in the Early Childhood Educators Act, 2007 (the Act), including the responsibilities to determine whether an applicant meets the requirements for registration and to provide appropriate direction to the Registration Member Services Department in accordance with the Act.

 

This organizational structure change established the Deputy Registrar role as being independent of the Registration and Member Services Department and reinforced the congruity between the Registrar and Deputy Registrar roles.

 

ii. Describe the impact of the improvements / changes on applicants.

By making the Deputy Registrar independent of the Registration and Member Services Department, applicants can be assured that the College’s organizational structure has appropriate mechanisms in place to ensure fairness and impartiality in the application process.

 

iii. Describe the impact of the improvements / changes on your organization.

With the organizational change, the College has a process to ensure that the Office of the Registrar, which includes the Registrar and Deputy Registrar, has reviewed all files for registration as assessed by the Registration and Member Services Department, before a decision is made about an applicant’s eligibility for registration.

 

Describe any registration-related improvements/changes to your enabling legislation and/or regulations in the last year

Bill 37, the Protecting Students Act, 2016, came into force on December 5, 2016. It included amendments to the Early Childhood Educators Act, 2007, some of which impact the College’s registration process.

 

  • The Registrar may impose a period of no longer than one year as a limitation for an applicant to apply to the Registration Appeals Committee for the removal of terms, conditions, or limitations (TCLs) imposed on a certificate of registration (the same applies to the Registration Appeals Committee in relation to its order-making authorities).    

 

  • Applicants that would like to have a TCL removed or varied may apply to the Registration Appeals Committee for determination.

 

  • The Council of the College may establish a roster of panelists to sit on reviews conducted by the Registration Appeals Committee.

 

BACK TO INDEX


2. Quantitative Information

a) Languages
Indicate the languages in which application information materials were available in the reporting year.
Language Yes/No
English Yes
French Yes
Other (please specify)
Additional comments:
 
b) Gender of applicants
Indicate the number of applicants in each category as applicable.
Gender Number of Applicants
Male 126
Female 5185
None of the above 0
Additional comments:

The reported data is based on the applications received in 2016.

c) Gender of members
Indicate the number of members in each category as applicable. Select the option that best corresponds to the terminology used by your organization.
Gender Number of Members
Male 898
Female 50210
None of the above 0
Additional comments:

The reported data is based on the total number of members the College considered to be in “good standing” at December 31, 2016.

d) Jurisdiction where applicants obtained their initial education
Indicate the number of applicants by the jurisdiction where they obtained their initial education1 in the profession or trade.
Ontario Other Canadian Provinces USA Other International Unknown Total
4992 99 22
Afghanistan
2
Albania
3
Australia
4
Austria
1
Bangladesh
1
Belgium
1
Benin
1
Bosnia And Herzegovina
1
Brazil
1
Ecuador
1
Egypt
3
France
2
Germany
2
Greece
2
Hong Kong
1
India
27
Iran
1
Ireland
5
Jamaica
6
Kazakhstan
1
Kenya
1
Korea, Republic Of
3
Lebanon
3
Malaysia
1
Moldova, Republic Of
1
Morocco
1
Netherlands
1
Nepal
1
Nigeria
1
Pakistan
5
Peru
1
Philippines
7
Russia
1
Sri Lanka
2
Sudan
1
Switzerland
1
Ukraine
1
U.K.
18
Total
116
82
5311

1 Recognizing that applicants may receive their education in multiple jurisdictions, for the purpose of this question, include only the jurisdiction in which an entry-level degree, diploma or other certification required to practice the profession or trade was obtained.

Additional comments:

The reported data is based on the applications received in 2016.

 

The reported data for the “Unknown” category includes individuals who applied on the basis of their equivalency certificate from AECEO/Aféseo or under the Agreement on Internal Trade (AIT). These individuals are considered based on the credential held; underlying training for these applicants is not evaluated by the College.

e) Jurisdiction where applicants who became registered members obtained their initial education
Indicate the number of applicants who became registered members in the reporting year by the jurisdiction where they obtained their initial education1 in the profession or trade.
Ontario Other Canadian Provinces USA Other International Unknown Total
4881 32 5
Australia
2
France
1
Israel
1
Lebanon
1
Peru
1
Poland
1
U.K.
1
Venezuela
1
Total
9
77
5004

1 Recognizing that applicants may receive their education in multiple jurisdictions, for the purpose of this question, include only the jurisdiction in which an entry-level degree, diploma or other certification required to practice the profession or trade was obtained.

Additional comments:

Applicants who became registered members in 2016 may have applied to the College in 2016 or in a previous year.

 

The reported data for the “Unknown” category includes individuals who applied on the basis of their equivalency certificate from AECEO/Aféseo or under the Agreement on Internal Trade (AIT). These individuals are considered based on the credential held; underlying training for these applicants is not evaluated by the College.

 

f) Jurisdiction where members were initially trained
Indicate the total number of registered members by jurisdiction where they obtained their initial education1 in the profession or trade.
Ontario Other Canadian Provinces USA Other International Unknown Total
48742 370 28
Argentina
1
Australia
10
Belarus
2
Brazil
4
Chile
3
China
5
Colombia
2
Czech Republic
1
Denmark
1
Ecuador
2
Egypt
1
France
9
Guyana
3
Hong Kong
2
India
15
Iran
1
Ireland
3
Israel
3
Jamaica
7
Japan
2
Korea
1
Korea, Republic Of
4
Lebanon
4
Mexico
2
Moldova, Republic Of
1
New Zealand
3
Nigeria
1
Norway
1
Pakistan
2
Peru
3
Philippines
4
Poland
2
Portugal
3
Romania
1
Serbia
7
S. Africa
2
Syrian Arab Republic
1
Taiwan, Province Of China
1
Ukraine
1
U.K.
41
Uruguay
1
Venezuela
6
Palestinian Territory, Occupied
1
Total
170
1798
51108

1 Recognizing that applicants may receive their education in multiple jurisdictions, for the purpose of this question, include only the jurisdiction in which an entry-level degree, diploma or other certification required to practice the profession or trade was obtained.

Additional comments:

The reported data is based on the total number of members the College considered to be in “good standing” at December 31, 2016.

 

The reported data for the “Unknown” category includes individuals who applied on the basis of their equivalency certificate from AECEO/Aféseo or under the Agreement on Internal Trade (AIT). These individuals are considered based on the credential held; underlying training for these applicants is not evaluated by the College.

g) Applications processed
Indicate the number of applications your organization processed in the reporting year:
Jurisdiction where applicants were initially trained in the profession (before they were granted use of the protected title or professional designation in Ontario)
from January 1st to December 31st of the reporting year Ontario Other Canadian Provinces USA Other International Unknown Total
New applications received 4992 99 22 116 82
5311
Applicants actively pursuing licensing (applicants who had some contact with your organization in the reporting year) 5473 117 29 161 90
5870
Inactive applicants (applicants who had no contact with your organization in the reporting year) 248 41 8 54 7
358
Applicants who met all requirements and were authorized to become members but did not become members 0 0 0 0 0
0
Applicants who became FULLY registered members 4881 32 5 9 77
5004
Applicants who were authorized to receive an alternative class of licence3 but were not issued a licence 0 0 0 0 0
0
Applicants who were issued an alternative class of licence3 0 0 0 0 0
0

1 An alternative class of licence enables its holder to practice with limitations, but additional requirements must be met in order for the member to be fully licensed.

Additional comments:

With respect to “inactive applicants”, the College experienced a small increase compared to the previous calendar year because of the number of applications the College considered to be “incomplete” while it sought an applicant’s consent to impose a term, condition, or limitation (TCL), or proceed with a Proposal to Impose Terms, Conditions, or Limitations.

 

The reported data for the “Unknown” category includes individuals who applied on the basis of their equivalency certificate from AECEO/Aféseo or under the Agreement on Internal Trade (AIT). These individuals are considered based on the credential held; underlying training for these applicants is not evaluated by the College.

 

While “0” is reported for “Applicants who were authorized to receive an alternative class of licence but were not issued a licence” and “Applicants who were issued an alternative class of licence”, these two fields are in fact not applicable to the College.

h) Classes of certificate/license
Inidcate and provide a description of the classes of certificate/license offered by your organization.

You must specify and describe at least one class of certificate/license (on line a) in order for this step to be complete.

# Certification Description
a) General Class Description (a)

The General Class is prescribed as the class of registration with the College (as per s. 2 of O. Reg. 221/08).

Additional comments:
 
i) Reviews and appeals processed
State the number of reviews and appeals your organization processed in the reporting year (use only whole numbers; do not enter commas or decimals).
Jurisdiction where applicants were initially trained in the profession (before they were granted use of the protected title or professional designation in Ontario)
from January 1st to December 31st of the reporting year Ontario Other Canadian Provinces USA Other International Unknown Total
Applications that were subject to an internal review or that were referred to a statutory committee of your governing council, such as a Registration Committee 0 0 0 0 0
0
Applicants who initiated an appeal of a registration decision 11 3 4 6 0
24
Appeals heard 16 9 4 8 0
37
Registration decisions changed following an appeal 0 0 0 0 0
0
Additional comments:

The data reported for appeals heard refers to the number of files that went before the Registration Appeals Committee in 2016, which included some files the College received in 2015.

 

While “0” is reported for “Applications that were subject to an internal review or that were referred to a statutory committee of your governing council, such as a Registration Committee”, this field is in fact not applicable to the College.

j) Paid staff
In the table below, enter the number of paid staff employed by your organization in the categories shown, on December 31 of the reporting year.

When providing information for each of the categories in this section, you may want to use decimals if you count your staff using half units. For example, one full-time employee and one part-time employee might be equivalent to 1.5 employees.

You can enter decimals to the tenths position only. For example, you can enter 1.5 or 7.5 but not 1.55 or 7.52.

Category Staff
Total staff employed by the regulatory body 49
Staff involved in appeals process 2
Staff involved in registration process 22
Additional comments:

The reported data is based on the number of individuals involved in a particular process. It is not based on the amount or proportion of staff time allotted to the process. 

BACK TO INDEX


3. Submission

Submission
I hereby certify that:
Name of individual with authority to sign on behalf of the organization:
Beth Deazeley
Title:
Registrar & CEO
Date:
2017/02/15

BACK TO INDEX