Hundreds of Ontario parents were denied pandemic payments they were entitled to. Here is why

A classroom is seen at Wazoson Public School of the Ottawa-Carleton District School Board (OCDSB) in Ottawa, on Friday, Dec. 5, 2025. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Justin Tang

Hundreds of Ontario parents did not receive payments that they were entitled to during the COVID-19 pandemic because the money was sent to someone else instead, a new report from the province’s acting ombudsman states.

The Ministry of Education launched five different direct payment programs meant to help parents amid repeated school closures during the pandemic, with the cheques ranging from $200 to $500 per school-aged child.

More than $2 billion was ultimately distributed to parents and guardians in Ontario, but in her new report released this week acting ombudsman Barbara Finlay says that hundreds of families appear to have been denied benefits that they were entitled to.

Finlay launched her investigation after receiving more than 200 complaints from parents and guardians regarding the five programs, which were introduced between 2020 and 2023.

She says that even following her investigation, it’s not clear how many families may have been impacted because the ministry “failed to make any effort to track improperly distributed funds.”

“In all, the programs dispensed more than $2 billion for affected children and youth, but the ministry took a ‘first-come, first-served approach’ to applications without verifying whether the claimant actually had custody of the child in question,” a news release accompanying the report notes.

“In fact, the ministry stated it would not get involved in custody matters and suggested that parents work out eligibility amongst themselves – something many involved in acrimonious or abusive situations could not do.”

Finlay said in the report that the direct payment programs to parents “were, by and large, successful in distributing billions of dollars to eligible families at a time when many needed financial assistance.”

However, she said that they were “rushed and plagued by problems” and those problems were then “replicated at each iteration instead of being fixed.”

An “inadequate complaint escalation and appeal process” subsequently exacerbated the situation for many parents, Finlay said.

In her report, Finlay provided several examples of where the programs fell short.

She said that one single mother with sole custody of her five school-aged children was denied benefits because the father of two of the children had already applied despite having no contact with the children for years.

In another case, Finlay said that the payments for an Ontario mother’s seven children were obtained by her ex-partner even though he only fathered four of them and had “limited visits.”

In a third instance, a grandmother with full custody was denied the funding because the mother of the child “who did not have custody or even contact” applied first.

“When they complained to the ministry these parents and guardians were provided with a boilerplate response, stating that the ministry could not get involved in custody matters,” Finlay said in the report. “They were directed to try to recover the benefit themselves, even as the ministry refused to disclose who the recipient was.”

Parents who wished to receive funding through the various direct payment programs during the pandemic had to complete an online application but did not need to provide any supporting documentation.

The form stipulated that “only one parent may apply for each child.” But it did not say that the parent would need to have custody as a condition of eligibility.

Finlay said that while applicants were asked to provide information about the children eligible for the benefits, including their full name and date of birth, it is likely that many people would have access to that information.

“According to one director who oversaw multiple programs, the ministry ‘had no way of knowing whether or not the person [who] received the payment [was] a parent or an aunt or … the guy on the street’,” the report notes.

Finlay made a total of 14 recommendations in her report, all of which have been accepted by the Ministry of Education.

Her recommendations include a call for the ministry to ensure all future direct payment programs are “comprehensively planned before launching” and “supported by adequate staffing resources” at each stage.

Here is the full list of recommendations:

1. The Ministry of Education should ensure that all aspects of program design and delivery are comprehensively planned before launching any future direct payment program.

2. The Ministry of Education should ensure that any future direct payment program is supported by adequate staffing resources and supports at every stage.

3. Prior to launching any future direct payment program, the Ministry of Education should establish and communicate clear eligibility criteria for applicants.

4. The Ministry of Education should ensure that any future direct payment program includes a clear and consistent method to verify eligibility and that verification takes place before funds are released.

5. The Ministry of Education should regularly conduct internal audits to assess the strength and effectiveness of its eligibility verification processes throughout the course of any future direct payment program and respond swiftly to any identified gaps or weaknesses in the process.

6. If the Ministry of Education relies on information rolled over from a previous program to establish eligibility for any future direct payment program, it should establish and apply a clear process to verify the continued eligibility of any rolled-over recipients.

7. If the Ministry of Education relies on information rolled over from a previous program to establish eligibility for any future direct payment program, it should ensure that applicants have a means to inform the Ministry of any changes that might impact eligibility. 30 Catching Up on Fairness June 2026

8. The Ministry of Education should ensure that frontline staff responding to complaints about any future direct payment program have access to all the information required to assess and respond to the complaint, and that they are empowered to do so.

9. The Ministry of Education should ensure that the complaints resolution process for any future direct payment program is adequately resourced to allow every complaint or inquiry to receive a response.

10. The Ministry of Education should adopt service standards for any complaints process it adopts relating to a direct payment program to ensure that complaints are properly documented and responded to in a timely fashion.

11. The Ministry of Education should ensure that any future direct payment program includes an accessible and effective mechanism to recover improperly distributed funds and redirect them to the intended recipient.

12. The Ministry of Education should establish an appeal process at the outset of any future direct payment program and ensure that it remains accessible throughout the program’s delivery period and for a sufficient time after the close of the program.

13. The Ministry of Education should clearly communicate the fact of the appeal process and how to file an appeal to the public.

14. The Ministry of Education should report back to my Office on its plans to implement my recommendations prior to its announcement of any future direct payment programs which might be contemplated.