Privatization is a risky formula for
better services
"If money is what (the government)
is trying to save, then talk to the front-line staff and find out how
money can be saved. Listen to the people on the front-line and let us
help save money if that's what the Ministry wants." Cindy
Shewfelt, Maurice H. Genest Centre for Youth
The Ministry predicts about a 20 per cent
saving in the transfer of Phase One Young Offender's facilities to the
private sector. Saving 2 to 3 million a year is less than .1 per cent of
the Ministry's budget. If programs and staffing levels are to be
maintained, it is doubtful that costs will be reduced by that much
unless the target for savings is the result of reduced wages and
benefits. If this were true, quality programs are at risk and
ultimately, children and communities suffer the consequences.
The Ministry's proposed divestment seems
a radical approach to finding small savings but brings with it a high
risk trade-off. Seeking a reduction in costs out of the pockets of
workers risks losing a dedicated, stable workforce - a key component of
successful programs for young people in custody.
"Direct operated facilities are a
good deal for the taxpayer in terms of the time, effort and energy we
invest in these kids. It will pay off with them by turning their lives
around and saving the taxpayer in the long run." Angelo
Mosca Jr., Arrell Youth Centre.
It is entirely possible that these same
efficiencies could be found in the current system.
A cost comparison shows little
difference:
- The 1997 Annual Report of the
Provincial Auditor, indicated that the average daily
count is 370 young offenders (Phase One) placed in secure detention
and secure custody facilities in the province. The directly operated
secure facilities have a total capacity of 146 beds, not including
18 swing beds and Phase Two settings with Phase One emergency beds,
which are opened when demand merits.
Ministry employees are delivering
nearly 50 per cent of the Secure Custody and Detention services in the
province. Should the Ministry repatriate the services of St. John's
School, more than 50 per cent of secure custody services would be run
directly by the Ministry.
Secure Custody Cost
Variances
| Type of
Custody |
Budgeted Cost Per
Day Based on Full Occupancy for Agencies reviewed ($) |
Province-Wide
Average Costs Per Day by Area Office, Based on Actual Expenditures
and Occupancy ($) |
| Secure
Custody (Ministry operated) |
264-353 |
303-407 |
| Secure
Custody (Agencies) |
207-349 |
238-427 |
Source: 1997 Annual Report of the
Provincial Auditor
- According to the Auditor’s Report,
cost variances may be attributed to varying client needs and the
extent of services provided. The significantly wider range in per
diems for transfer payment facilities are often the result of
cheaper dormitory style resources which impact severely on the
young offender’s right to privacy as noted in the Child and
Family Services Act, Sec. 104(a).
- The costs of transfer payment
facilities identified here don't tell the whole story. Their annual
budgets don't include contingency funds or hard-to-serve dollars.
DOE facilities do not have access to those funds and therefore their
budget lines are clearer and more predictable.
"When other agencies serve our kids,
they often require one-to-one or two-on-one staffing to cope with their
behaviour. This is very expensive. If we are privatized, my guess is
there will be much more of this. This will be a hidden but pricey cost.
Such funding ends up outside of regular budgets. It is called special or
one time funding."
Vivian Van Wagner, Syl Apps, Secure Treatment Unit.
- Financial accountability is best
achieved when the distance between the funding body and service
deliverer is minimized. Through its hands-on management group, the
Ministry is best able to identify when increased efficiencies may be
found. These facilities are able to respond directly and identify
program implications.
- In direct operated facilities, the
government is able to recover funds that have not been spent. By
contrast, the Provincial Auditor has identified significant recovery
problems in the Transfer Payment sector. (See Section 3.05, Surplus
Recovery, of the 1997 Annual Report of the Provincial Auditor.)
"I've worked in a few group homes
and in a transfer-payment agency as a part-time employee. It's all about
money. It's very expensive to rehabilitate this type of client and
historically, the transfer payment agencies have been very poorly
funded. They don't attract the same quality of education level of staff,
nor do they provide the same level of training." Kelvin
Proctor, Maurice H. Genest Detention Centre.
"I suspect part of the motive of
privatization is the ease with which budgets can be cut. Having worked
in the private sector, I know first-hand that accountability is not the
same. Even with non-profit service providers, they are unable or
unwilling to push for adequate funding. They fear making waves will
result in losing their licences. When money is cut compliance is cut and
no one is accountable. It is the kids who lose at the front end and
society in the long run…." Vivian
Van Wagner, Syl Apps, Secure Treatment Unit.
- As professionals in the system, we are
committed to efficient and effective services for the children in
our care.
Our conclusion:
While the Ministry has been clear about
cutting costs it is also faced with an increasing demand for measurable
outcomes in the care, custody and development of children in conflict
with the law.
The Auditor General's report points to a
range of problems which already exist in the transfer-payment sector
regarding measurable outcomes, financial management and accountability.
Further, it is evident that taken as a whole, the difference in costs
between the transfer-payment and the direct operated system is
negligible.
In the proposed privatization, cost cuts
can really only come from workers' pockets. Private sector operators,
who are approaching OPSEU members, are quick to say they would be happy
to pay workers full wages but benefits and pensions are a non-starter.
We know this is a recipe for disaster. The Ministry will be at risk
of losing its greatest resource - the trained, experienced and committed
workers behind the walls. That kind of trade-off cannot possibly
contribute to making our services better, increasing accountability or
assuring stability in the larger system, which is on the brink of
crisis.
Go to Compliance with the Young
Offender Services Manual | Return to Main Young Offenders
Facilities Page
