Search results

Canada is one of a number of countries (e.g. Netherlands, Belgium, France, Germany and Ireland) in which the provision of social services is considered to be a partnership between government and nonprofit service providers, with government providing the money and the nonprofit organizations (NPOs) delivering the service. However, the Canadian model incorporates two significant features of the Anglo-Saxon model, as practiced in Great Britain, United States and Australia. First, many Canadian social service NPOs receive additional philanthropic support, some even relying exclusively on philanthropy; and second, many social service NPOs benefit from a large volunteer presence (Hall, Barr, Easwaramoorthy, Wojciech & Salamon, 2005).Overall, the social service sector receives 66% of their revenues from government sources - mostly from provincial governments (Barr et al., 2005). Keywords: CVSS, Centre for Voluntary Sector Studies, Working Paper Series,TRSM, Ted Rogers School of Management Citation: ; Meinhard, A., Lo, L. & Hyman, I. (2015). The provision of services to new immigrants in Canada: characteristics of government-non-profit partnerships (Working Paper Series Volume 2015 (2)). Toronto: Ted Rogers School of Management, Centre for Voluntary Sector Studies, Ryerson University.

As we approach the 40th anniversary of Canada's multiculturalism policy, the concept of multiculturalism is under attack in many jurisdictions. The leaders of Germany, France and Britain, have each declared that multiculturalism has been a failure in their countries, serving to separate and segregate, rather than integrate (Edmonton Journal, February 13, 2011). It seems timely therefore, to briefly review the origins and evolution of Canada's multiculturalism policy and examine future directions in light of the changing global and national situation, and newly emerging public discourses on integration, inclusion and the meaning of Canadian identity. The focus of this paper is on the role multiculturalism policy plays in creating a more inclusionary society in the twenty-first century in Canada. We set the context by presenting a brief historical overview of multiculturalism policy since its introduction in 1971 and summarizing some of the recent Canadian discourse surrounding multiculturalism. One of the key questions we explore is whether multiculturalism policy should move beyond focusing on the integration of population groups marginalized by national, racial, religious or ethnic origins, to addressing broader social inclusionary processes that influence inequities and impact on nation. Keywords: CVSS, Centre for Voluntary Sector Studies, Working Paper Series,TRSM, Ted Rogers School of Management Citation: ; Hyman, I., Meinhard, A. & Shields, J. (2011). The role of multiculturalism policy in addressing social inclusion processes in Canada (Working Paper Series Volume 2011 (3)).Toronto: Ted Rogers School of Management, Centre for Voluntary Sector Studies, Ryerson University.

Background Violence is a critical public health problem associated with compromised health and social suffering that are preventable. The Centre for Global Health and Health Equity organized a forum in 2014 to identify: (1) priority issues related to violence affecting different population groups in Canada, and (2) strategies to take action on priority issues to reduce violence-related health inequities in Canada. In this paper, we present findings from the roundtable discussions held at the Forum, offer insights on the socio-political implications of these findings, and provide recommendations for action to reduce violence through research, policy and practice. Methods Over 60 academic researchers, health and social service agency staff, community advocates and graduate students attended the daylong Forum, which included presentations on structural violence, community violence, gender-based violence, and violence against marginalized groups. Detailed notes taken at the roundtables were analyzed by the first author using a thematic analysis technique. Findings The thematic analysis identified four thematic areas: 1) structural violence perpetuates interpersonal violence - the historical, social, political and economic marginalization that contributes to personal and community violence. 2) social norms of gender-based violence—the role of dominant social norms in perpetuating the practice of violence, especially towards women, children and older adults; 3) violence prevention and mitigation programs—the need for policy and programming to address violence at the individual/interpersonal, community, and societal levels; and 4) research gaps—the need for comprehensive research evidence made up of systematic reviews, community-based intervention and evaluation of implementation research to identify effective programming to address violence. Conclusions The proceedings from the Global Health and Health Equity Forum underscored the importance of recognizing violence as a public health issue that requires immediate and meaningful communal and structural investment to break its historic cycles. Based on our thematic analysis and literature review, four recommendations are offered: (1) Support and adopt policies to prevent or reduce structural violence; (2) Adopt multi-pronged strategies to transform dominant social norms associated with violence; (3) Establish standards and ensure adequate funding for violence prevention programs and services; and (4) Fund higher level ecological research on violence prevention and mitigation. ; Hyman, I., Vahabi, M., Bailey, A., Patel, S., Gurue, S., Wilson-Mitchell, K., & Wong, J. P-H. (2016). Taking action on violence through research, policy and practice. Global Health Research and Policy. 9(3).