Advocacy for People in Federal Prisons Designated for Women and Conditions of Confinement

2025

2025

2025

2025

2025

On June 11th, CAEFS was in federal court working to ensure that the Correctional Service of Canada upholds their legal obligation to ensure safety and healthy living conditions at the Edmonton Institution for Women (EIFW)

This court application is specific to the temperature inside the maximum-security unit at EIFW. Since 2006, people have reported to CAEFS that they experience excessively hot and cold temperatures while incarcerated on the unit – far outside the habitual range and to the point of being, we argue, torturous.

This application was argued by Kate Engle of Taylor Janis LLP, acting as counsel for CAEFS.

In the law:

CCRA s. 70: The Service shall take all reasonable steps to ensure that penitentiaries, the penitentiary environment, the living and working conditions of inmates and the working conditions of staff members are safe, healthful and free of practices that undermine a person’s sense of personal dignity.

While this application is specific to EIFW, CAEFS has received many other reports that the physical conditions of confinement experienced by women and gender-diverse people in federal prison are often not aligned with the law.

For example, in this month’s advocacy letters, advocates wrote about the ongoing impact of extreme heat conditions at the Grand Valley Institution (GVI), and the limited steps taken to mitigate its impacts on people incarcerated there – a well-documented issue year over year at GVI.

At EIFW, there continued to be reports related to the conditions in the maximum-security unit, specifically the presence of maggots, mould, and clogged drains.

CAEFS is committed to working towards a world without prisons, but monitoring the physical conditions of confinement of people who are in prison is still essential to the well-being of people who are incarcerated today.

May 2025 Update

Did you know that the legislated purpose of the federal correctional system is to support people in prison and on parole to reintegrate back into the community?

In the law:  

CCRA s. 3 The purpose of the federal correctional system is to contribute to the maintenance of a just, peaceful and safe society by

(a) carrying out sentences imposed by courts through the safe and humane custody and supervision of [federally sentenced people]; and

(b) assisting the rehabilitation of [federally sentenced people] and their reintegration into the community as law-abiding citizens through the provision of programs in penitentiaries and in the community.

The Parole Board of Canada emphasizes that gradual, structured release—known as the continuum of release—is the most effective approach to supporting community reintegration. This continuum of release includes all forms of conditional release, such as escorted temporary absences, unescorted temporary absences, work releases, day parole, full parole, and statutory release. You can learn more about these types of conditional release via the Parole Board of Canada’s website.

Despite its proven effectiveness, incarcerated people consistently report barriers to accessing conditional release and are frequently documented in our advocacy letters.

This month, there were reports of challenges in accessing parole officers at the Nova Institution, making it challenging for people to effectively plan for their release. At the Fraser Valley Institution, people reported long delays in completing their first escorted temporary-absence due to staff availability and limited access to required risk assessments – delays that people were concerned could jeopardize their timely access to day parole. At the Grand Valley Institution, an individual shared that their escorted temporary absence to attend a family funeral was denied due to reported logistical challenges.

Looking back at past letters, you will find many other instances of reported barriers.

One of the ways that CAEFS is looking to address these reported concerns is by ensuring that people in prison understand their legal eligibility for conditional release and how to effectively prepare for parole. Part of this is done through the distribution of our Community in Action Guide. In some cases, CAEFS advocates also attend or assist at individual’s parole hearings. Lead advocates work closely with the peer advocates on their time to also ensure that they can provide meaningful support to people in this area.

Peer Advocates & Trainings

Speaking of, a new peer advocate was hired at the Fraser Valley Institution this month! She has been resourced with supplies and CAEFS-created resources, just like all our other Peer Advocates.

Peer advocates are incarcerated people in prisons designated for women and receive training and ongoing support by CAEFS in a recognized employment position by the Correctional Service of Canada. They are integral members of our Regional Advocacy teams.

A prerequisite to becoming a Peer Advocate is participating in CAEFS Peer Advocacy training, held annually or bi-annually at each federal prison designated for women. The training provides participants with a foundation in the legislative frameworks applicable to penitentiaries, encourages systemic-level problem solving, and provides guidance in effectively utilizing the internal grievance process – along with other key advocacy skills.

We are looking forward to hosting a number of peer advocacy trainings in the fall and welcoming more peer advocates to our teams!

Did you know? Last year CAEFS provided our peer advocacy training to 180 people in federal prisons designated for women? That is nearly 25% of people incarcerated in these penitentiaries.

Here is what one participant had to say about their experience of the training:

“I feel you women ran a super in-depth course and it was inclusive and I want to thank you. I’ve come away with a lot more knowledge with which to be able to stand up for my rights and those of the other women housed here”.

Did you know that in federal prisons designated for women, most people cook their own meals? In most cases, individuals incarcerated in minimum- and medium-security units are given a weekly budget to purchase groceries from a list stocked by the institution. They then prepare their own food within their living units. By contrast, those incarcerated in maximum-security units receive pre-made meals delivered on trays by food services staff.

Recently, the Correctional Service of Canada (CSC) reduced the grocery budgets for people in prisons designated for women, while increasing the budgets in prisons designated for men. The rationale provided was that women require fewer calories than men. However, current government nutrition guidelines do not distinguish recommended caloric intake based on sex or gender. As the cost of groceries continues to rise across the country, people in federal prisons—especially those in prisons designated for women—are struggling to afford sufficient food.

This is just one of several food-related concerns that CAEFS has recently documented. In April, people incarcerated at both Grand Valley Institution and Nova Institution raised serious concerns about access to adequate food.

In a letter from Nova, advocates documented reports of limited access to sufficient food in the maximum-security unit. People shared that they often felt hungry due to small portion sizes, inadequate protein, and an over-reliance on starches. Similar reports have emerged from maximum-security units in other women’s prisons.

For the second month in a row, advocates working with people at GVI documented concerns about insufficient access to food on the main compound. In some cases, people were forced to use their full grocery budget on the limited items available—for example, spending it all on multiple cans of pumpkin purée or $50 worth of sardines.

You can read more about these reports in this month’s letters.

At the Fraser Valley Institution, peer committees continue to advocate for equitable access to food, specifically for the growing population of individuals who are gender-diverse. More details about these reports can be found in FVI letters from earlier this year. 

In the Law

The Corrections and Conditional Release Regulations state:
CCRR s. 83(2): The Service shall take all reasonable steps to ensure the safety of every [incarcerated person] and that every [incarcerated person] is (a) adequately clothed and fed.

The Corrections and Conditional Release Act states:
CCRA s. 70: The Service shall take all reasonable steps to ensure that penitentiaries, the penitentiary environment, the living and working conditions of inmates and the working conditions of staff members are safe, healthful and free of practices that undermine a person’s sense of personal dignity.

As part of our work, Regional Advocacy Teams often host workshops and events to support people in prison in better understanding their rights as federally sentenced individuals.

This month, during our regular advocacy visit to Grand Valley Institution, the Ontario Regional Advocacy Team hosted a series of workshops to launch CAEFS’ new resource: Community in Action: A Handbook for Federally Sentenced Women and Gender-Diverse People to Navigate Release from Prison and Being on Parole.

Advocates met with individuals across all security levels, providing them with copies of Community in Action, answering questions about conditional release, gathering feedback on what additional information would help people feel more prepared to navigate these processes, and sharing some delicious snacks.

Since then, advocates have been working to incorporate participant feedback into an updated version of the resource. We’ve also received valuable input from peer advocates at other prisons designated for women, as well as from volunteers with lived experience. This iterative process is central to how CAEFS develops resources aimed at supporting both self- and peer-led advocacy.

The Community in Action handbook was developed in response to ongoing reports from people in prison and on parole about the challenges they face accessing conditional release and navigating these complex systems. Many of these concerns are also reflected in our monthly systemic advocacy letters.

You can access the handbook below and are welcome to share it with anyone who might benefit. People in federal prisons designated for women can request printed copies through their Regional Advocacy Teams.

Did you know that conditional release provides the strongest opportunity for successful reintegration? The Parole Board of Canada emphasizes that gradual, structured release—known as the continuum of release—is the most effective approach to supporting community reintegration. Importantly, one of the two core purposes of the Correctional Service of Canada is to assist people in reintegrating into the community.

In the law:
The Corrections and Conditional Release Act states:

CCRA s. 3(b):
The purpose of the federal correctional system is to contribute to the maintenance of a just, peaceful and safe society by […] (b) assisting in the rehabilitation of [incarcerated people] and their reintegration into the community as law-abiding citizens through the provision of programs in penitentiaries and in the community.

Update on Access to Families
CAEFS continues to receive reports of barriers to family contact, an issue we highlighted last month. At Fraser Valley Institution, individuals in the maximum-security unit raised concerns about limited access to video visits. At Grand Valley Institution, people reported delays in visitor application approvals, often waiting months to see family in person. They also reported the impact of a broken telephone in one of the living units. At Edmonton Institution for Women, people continued to raise concerns about the phone system—this time noting delays in having family members added to their approved phone list (also known as a PIN).

In February, CAEFS participated in a national consultation on the Correctional Service of Canada’s (CSC) Institutional Mother-Child Program, alongside other community organizations. This consultation is one of several ways CAEFS has provided feedback on the program and raised the concerns of incarcerated mothers and caregivers with decision-makers at CSC.

However, the Institutional Mother-Child Program is just one example of how incarcerated people try to maintain connections with their families. CAEFS continues to receive reports about broader barriers to family access. For instance, during our February 2025 visits, individuals at the Edmonton Institution for Women reported reduced access to phone lines on the main compound and expressed concern that this restriction would limit their ability to stay in contact with loved ones. At the Nova Institution, advocates followed up with senior management teams regarding the impact of Private Family Visits being cancelled with little notice.

Did you know that one of the primary reasons Canadian penitentiaries designated for women were built in each region was to promote close community and familial connections for federally sentenced women and gender-diverse people? In fact, most people incarcerated in these institutions were their children’s primary caregivers at the time of incarceration. As a result, the imprisonment of women and gender-diverse people has far-reaching impacts on families—particularly children. These harms are especially acute for Indigenous communities, given the disproportionate incarceration of Indigenous women and the historical legacy of family separation through colonial policies such as the Sixties Scoop and Residential Schools. For these reasons, CAEFS continues to recommend that all CSC decisions be made with the goal of facilitating the broadest and most accessible contact with family and community.

In the law:
The Corrections and Conditional Release Act (CCRA) guarantees that people in federal custody are entitled to reasonable contact with their families.

CCRA s. 71(1):
In order to promote relationships between [incarcerated people] and the community, an [incarcerated person] is entitled to have reasonable contact, including visits and correspondence, with family, friends, and other persons from outside the penitentiary, subject to such reasonable limits as are prescribed for protecting the security of the penitentiary or the safety of persons.

This month, we focused on building and strengthening our capacity!  

Onboarding new volunteers: We recently welcomed over a dozen new community-based volunteers to our Regional Advocacy teams.  

Expanding our Peer Advocacy teams: We welcomed two new peer advocates at the Okimaw Ohci Healing Lodge, following a two-day in-person training that CAEFS held at the Lodge in October 2024. We have also hired new Peer Advocates at the Fraser Valley Institution and the Joliette Institution for Women.  

These new members of our team will begin working alongside our existing Peer Advocates there.  

Student Placements: CAEFS also welcomed Eric Shatosky, a long-time Ontario team volunteer for his student placement at Humber Polytechnic in Toronto. Eric is part of a larger group of placement students working with CAEFS, including six law students through Pro Bono Students Canada at Thompson Rivers University in Kamloops. Are you interested in completing a placement with CAEFS? If so, learn more here. 

Deepening our Reach: At the Nova Institution for Women, the Peer Advocates are working on launching the “Nova Newsletter”. This newsletter will include legal information, highlight key issues, and share information about committee meetings and events, and much more!  

At the Fraser Valley Institution, our Lead Advocate (Brianna) is working with Peer Advocates to develop a workshop to support peer-led committees. Once developed, it will be shared across our teams to support peer-led committees at all federal penitentiaries designated for women. Committees are an essential  

CAEFS has also recently established regular phone calls with Peer Advocates at the Joliette Institution and the Okimaw Ochi Healing Lodge, allowing us to provide more consistent rights and redress support and to work collaboratively to advocate for the people incarcerated there. Lead advocates have similar processes established to stay connected with Peer Advocates between visits at all other federal prisons designated for women too.  

In- Person Advocacy Visits: In January, our teams completed in-person advocacy visits to the Nova Institution, the Grand Valley Institution, the Edmonton Institution for Women, and the Fraser Valley Institution. This means that our teams spent over 70 hours meeting in-person with federally incarcerated women and gender-diverse people in January.  

Systemic Advocacy Letters: Our systemic advocacy letters are now being published to our website on a monthly basis. These letters are written following each of our in-person advocacy visits and create an evidentiary record of the conditions of confinement inside federal prisons designated for women, and provide real-time access to the scope of issues in prisons designated for women to key policy-makers and stakeholders.