NAC Blog

Response to Clifford Quaw

October 6, 2008 – 5:00 pm

The purpose of the Reconsideration is to avoid the delay of an appeal to the NAC. As there are several thousand persons whose claims were not allowed because of insufficient information, the NAC believed it might be of assistance to give persons an opportunity to provide further back up when the initial review had not found evidence that they were at the school. It is unclear from your request whether or not you have sent pictures and school attendance records for years for which you were denied. However, in general, we have encouraged the Reconsideration process in order to require Canada to make a closer analysis and to hopefully locate additional documents which may assist persons in being able to obtain their full CEP to which they are entitled in a more timely way without the necessity of an appeal.

Posted in From the NAC, NAC Replies, Reconsideration, Reviewing Appeals | 1 Comment »

Response to Sophie Lockhart

October 6, 2008 – 4:58 pm

Thank you for the Blog on behalf of Mr. Walter Beardy. I urge that you follow up directly with the contact number on the CEP form for Reconsideration.

We can advise you that the NAC has met with respect to the first appeals of the CEP. As a result of the information provided to us we have sent back a number of these for further follow up on reconsideration as it appears that there was not follow up with respect to the proposed additional information.

We can advise all persons who are providing names of other people and their phone numbers that it is important that you provide something in writing from those other people to be sent in in support of your reconsideration. Because there are over 20,000 cases in Reconsideration, it would be enormously time consuming if the researchers contacted each and every name that they were provided with.

However, we have also requested that the researchers follow up to determine if any of the persons who are referred to were at the school at the same time that you are claiming for additional years.

Finally, we have given directions that the priority for the appeals to the NAC should be for elders and survivors in ill-health. I hope this information is of assistance to you as the NAC very much wants to assist those who have appealed their CEP decision.

Posted in From the NAC, NAC Replies, Reviewing Appeals, The Appeal Process | 1 Comment »

Response to Sharon Favell

October 6, 2008 – 4:52 pm

Thank you for your inquiry with Respect to Teulon Residence. The NAC has a mandate to address appeals with respect to schools that are not entitled to be listed. At this time, we have just started to receive the decisions from Canada as to the rejection of schools. We are in the process of reviewing those and will determine based on the information provided those schools where there should be a review. Article 12.01(5) provides that:
“should either the requestor or the NAC dispute Canada’s decision to refuse to add a proposed institution, the requestor may apply to the appropriate Court, or the NAC may apply to the Court of the Province or Territory where the requestor resides for determination”

As we have just received the information from Canada as to which schools Canada has not determined to be eligible and their reasons, we have not yet had the opportunity to review each and every school. We shall do a follow up report on Teulon Residence given that you have specifically asked about this school.

You also indicate that St. Paul’s Hostel in Yukon was an approved school. This was a decision made by Canada and not by the NAC. Because it was approved as a school, we will not be reviewing that decision as we are only reviewing the decisions with respect to those schools that Canada has determined are not eligible and where there may be some question as to their eligibility. However, you may want to know that the Agreement provides that an institution may be added where:

a) The child was placed in a residence away from the family home by or under the authority of Canada for the purposes of education; and,
b) Canada was jointly or solely responsible for the operation of the residence and care of the children resident there.

Joint and sole responsibility by Canada has been based on some criteria which are listed under as:

a) Institutions Federally owned;
b) Canada is assumed parent of the child;
c) Canada was at least partially responsible for the administration of the institution;
d) Canada inspected or had a right to inspect the institution; or
e) Canada did or did not stipulate the institution as an IRS.

These criteria are not the only criteria to determine Canada’s responsibility for the operation of a residence.

We hope that this answers your questions.

Posted in From the NAC, NAC Replies | No Comments »

Appeals to NAC of CEP decisions

October 6, 2008 – 3:38 pm

In order to have an effective appeal mechanism to the NAC (which has only seven votes) a confidential Secure FTP Site had to be established with all of the appeal documents for each appeal.  This work was completed in the summer and we started to review appeals for decision at the beginning of September.  The first appeals were heard by the NAC on September 12.

 

At the time of the first appeals we wanted to determine whether there were means of making the appeal process more efficient and effective.  As a result, we took two general decisions by way of Record of Decision [ROD] to provide directives to the researchers on reconsideration.  Because these decisions affect all NAC appeals, they are set out below.

 

For CEP appellants it is very important for you to know that because of the large number of appeals it was determined that it would cause extensive delay if names and contact numbers only were provided of persons who could attest to your attendance at the school during a disputed year.  We have requested that the researchers when speaking with you specifically request that there be a statement from any of these individuals so that we have a record.

 

We have  conducted ten appeals but a number of those have gone back for follow-up by the Trustee as we were not satisfied that sufficient information was available to us.  We believe that this is a preferable option because we did not want to make a final decision on the appeal without a complete follow-up with respect to information that was provided and it was clear that a number of the appellants believed that if they gave contact information with respect to other witnesses that was sufficient in itself.  The ROD made on September 12 addressed this issue and is of importance to those appealing. 

 

We remain committed as the NAC to try to make the appeal process as efficient and effective as possible while at the same time ensuring that your rights of a full and fair appeal are considered. In order to do so, we review all documents submitted as part of the appeal. 

 

The three RODs of September 12, 2008 are:

 

Record of Decision dated September 12, 2008: All files currently under Reconsideration will be reviewed by INAC Research with a view to reconsidering the additional materials or information provided by applicants and in the cases where names are provided by applicants of individuals who attended or were employed at the Residential School, those names will be researched to determine if they resided or were employed at the school during the years under reconsideration and the results of such research shall be provided to the NAC.

 

- and -

 

 

Record of Decision dated September 12, 2008:  All files currently under Appeal will be reviewed by INAC Research with a view to reconsidering the additional materials or information provided by applicants either at Reconsideration or on the Appeal Applications and in the cases where names are provided by applicants of individuals who attended or were employed at the Residential School, those names will be researched to determine if they resided or were employed at the school during the years under appeal and the results of such research shall be provided to the NAC.

 

- and -

 

Record of Decision dated September 12, 2008:  In all cases either under Reconsideration or under Appeal, where applicants have provided names of supporting individuals, the Trustee will advise the applicants that the supporting individuals must provide INAC Research or the Trustee with the supporting information in writing.

 

 

Records of Decision of the NAC are posted on the Secure FTP Site.

Posted in From the NAC, Reviewing Appeals, The Appeal Process | 12 Comments »

Response to Ronald Brian Joseph Fontaine

September 22, 2008 – 6:56 pm

If you have completed a reconsideration application with respect to the missing years from the CEP payment, you should receive a response from the Secretariat, who are implementing the CEP payment.  If you have not filed an application for reconsideration, you should do so, so that the missing years can  be investigated more fully.

 

As a courtesy, we are forwarding your email to the administrator of reconsideration.  In the view of the NAC, your email should be dealt with as though it is an application for reconsideration.  Please contact the Common Experience Payment Response Centre at 1-866-565-4526 for more information.

Posted in From the NAC, NAC Replies | 3 Comments »

Response to Camila Wadsworth

September 22, 2008 – 6:52 pm

You have asked about the reconsideration timelines.  The NAC has been informed that when there is reconsideration, and if the case is complex, there is a manual review of all documents including additional documents.  In complex cases, we directed the Secretariat to inform persons in writing if additional time was needed.  The purpose of reconsideration was to hopefully resolve the number of appeals prior to them going to a formal appeal process with the NAC.  The INAC does not make the final decision.  If your reconsideration is denied you  have the right of appeal to the NAC.

 

The NAC is concerned with the delays on reconsideration but has been assured and has reviewed the process to satisfy itself that any delays are as a result of a more careful review of all available documents at the time of reconsideration.

Posted in From the NAC, NAC Replies | 4 Comments »

Response to Marilyn Louis

September 22, 2008 – 6:47 pm

We have been asked why we are only meeting once a month when there is a need to “review thousands of claims”. 

 

Up until now, there have been no appeals submitted to the  NAC.  We are in the middle of establishing a processing system for appeals after reconsideration. 

 

The NAC shall be meeting for a full day session to deal with the first of the appeals.  We are then going to review our process and determine the most efficient way to deal with the rest of the appeals in a timely manner. 

 

Because no appeals have yet been brought to the NAC, we have been able to complete our business by a full day session, one day a month.

Posted in From the NAC, NAC Replies | 3 Comments »

Welcome

June 17, 2008 – 2:44 pm

The NAC invites your comments about the administration of the Settlement Agreement.

Please post any comments you may have here.

Postings/comments are not those of the NAC and that the administrator of the site reserves the right to remove any and/or all postings in its sole discretion.

Posted in From Admin | 13 Comments »