The governance of children with disabilities and their families: Charting the public‐sector regime in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: This article discusses governance and accountability structures that relate to the contemporary agenda of inclusion for children with disabilities in Canada. Who are the major public‐sector actors in policies for children with disabilities and their families? What governance roles does the sector perform? What are the defining trends that characterize the sector in the present age? The scope of the analysis is a broad scan of structures and roles rather than a detailed inventory of programs. Three clusters of governing activities are addressed: policy planning, consultation and coordination; creating structures, allocating resources and delivering services; and accountability roles and processes. Each of the clusters is examined in relation to public‐sector organizations general to government and to organizations specific to child and family and to disability issues. The education, health‐care and social‐service sectors are profiled to identify important trends and issues in the governance of Canadian disability policy. A concern of the public sector's governance regime for children with disabilities and their families is the absence of clear, consistent and central accountability mechanisms. There is a déjà vu discourse on disability reform, a strong sense that we have been here before. Among other factors, this frustrating pace of reform is due to bureaucratic factors and weak accountability mechanisms. To overcome this déjà vu, the author calls for the adoption of a more inclusive and integrated governance regime for the disability policy domain. Sommaire: Le prdéjàsent article porte sur les structures de gouvernance et de reddition de comptes concernant le programme aduel d'inclusion des enfants handicapés au Canada. Qui sont les principaux acteurs du secteur public responsables des politiques pour les enfants handicapés et leurs familles ? Quels rôles de gouvemance estce que le secteur joue? Quelles sont les tendances spécifiques qui caractérisent ce secteur à I'heure actuelle? L'analyse porte sur un vaste ensemble de structures et de rôles, plutôt que sur un inventaire détaillé de programmes. Trois groupes d'activités gouvernementales sont étudiés:la planification, la consultation et la coordination de politiques; la création de structures, l'affectation de ressources et la prestation de services; et les rôles et processus de la responsabilisation. Chacun de ces groupes est examiné par rapport aux organismes du secteur public dépendant du gouvemement et aux organismes relatifs à l'enfance et à la famille et aux questions d'invalidité. Les secteurs de l'éducation, des soins de santé et des services sociaux sont présentés pour identifier les tendances et questions importantes dans la gouvemance de la politique canadienne sur l'invalidité. Une précupation du régime de gouvernance du secteur public concemant les enfants handicapés et leurs familles est I'absence de mécanismes centraux de responsabilisation qui soient clairs, consistants et centralisés. Ce discours sur la réforme de l'invalidité a déjàété tenu. La lenteur frustrante de cette réforme est attribuable entre autres à des facteurs bureaucratiques et à de faibles mécanismes de reddition de comptes. Pour aller au‐dellà de ce déjà vu, I'auteur sumère l'adoption d'un régime de gouvemance plus inclusif et plus intégré pour le domaine des politiques en matière d'invalidité.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".