Jessie was concerned with the process followed by the Ministry of Social Development and Poverty Reduction (MSDPR) in responding to her request to add her children as dependents. By adding the children, Jessie would receive additional funds from the ministry to assist her in supporting her family. Jessie informed us that her children were recently returned to her care by the Ministry of Children and Family Development (MCFD). When she asked the ministry to add her children as dependents, Jessie provided a letter from MCFD confirming her children had been returned to her care. While she was waiting for MSDPR’s approval for her children to be added as dependents, Jessie had to direct a portion of her shelter funds to support the children. This resulted in her not being able to pay her entire rent.

When Jessie contacted the ministry and told staff about the financial hardship she was experiencing due to the delays, she was told that her request would be assessed on an urgent basis and to check back the following day. She called back the next day and was told that her request had been re-categorized as non-urgent and that it would not be reviewed until the following week. That same day Jessie received notification from her landlord that she had three business days to pay her rental arrears or be evicted. Jessie called the ministry again and asked to speak with a supervisor but didn’t receive a response.

We quickly investigated whether MSDPR followed a reasonable process responding to Jessie’s urgent request.

We discussed Jessie’s complaint and requested information about how the ministry had assessed her request. The ministry noted that when Jessie initially contacted them, two service requests were created, both identified as being “urgent”. However, another staff member reviewed the service requests and assigned a standard date for adding Jessie’s children as dependents because no details were included in the request explaining the urgency of her requests. The records indicated that when Jessie told ministry staff that the delay would cause financial hardship, the staff member failed to return the service request to its urgent status.

The ministry acknowledged that this did not reflect expectations for how the information provided by Jessie should have been recorded by staff and that steps would be taken to address the issue. The ministry also confirmed that Jessie’s request would be expedited and we were notified that she was issued a cheque later that same day. Jessie’s contact with us resulted in the ministry addressing her urgent need expeditiously and avoiding eviction from her home.