CNAR'S NETWORK NEWS eMAGAZINE Issue 07. Spring 2025
From the CNAR Board Chair
Dear CNAR community,
After an extensive nationwide executive search, we are pleased to announce JenniferBertrand,MA,CAE,ACC, as CNAR’s new Executive Director. Jennifer assumed her role with CNAR on May 2nd, 2025.
Most recently, Jennifer served as Executive Director of the Canadian Alliance of Regulatory Bodies of Traditional Chinese Medicine Practitioners and Acupuncturists to guide the organization through a period of significant growth and evolution. Prior to this role, Jennifer had the privilege of supporting the College of Opticians of Alberta as Chief Executive Officer and Registrar and helped to lead the organization through its legislated transition to a single-mandate regulatory college. Jennifer has also held multiple senior roles in the engineering and geoscience technology profession, including Registrar of the Association of Science and Engineering Technology Professionals of Alberta and Managing Director of Technology Professionals
Canada. With a collaborative leadership style, Jennifer is known for fostering trust, navigating change with creativity and care, and aligning people and purpose through effective governance and policy frameworks. Her board and committee service includes roles with organizations such as Technology Accreditation Canada, the National Alliance of Canadian Optician Regulators, the Alberta Federation of Regulated Health Professions, and the Canadian Society of Association Executives.
Jennifer is excited to join the CNAR team and contribute to its role as a unifying force in Canada’s regulatory landscape. She looks forward to championing high-quality programming, fostering inclusive and meaningful engagement across professions and jurisdictions, and strengthening CNAR’s impact through collaboration, thought leadership, and strategic growth. With a deep appreciation for the complexities of regulation and the people who steward it, Jennifer is committed to advancing CNAR’s mission and supporting its members in navigating the evolving needs of the public and the professions they serve.
Thank you to all who supported us during this period of transition, particularly my incredibly dedicated fellow Board of Directors and the extraordinary CNAR staff.
Sincerely,
Alice Kennedy, BN, MBA, FCCHL, FCHSRF CNAR Board Chair
Volunteer Special Feature
CNAR could not do what we do without the dedication of our volunteer community. We extend our heartfelt thanks to the many people who contribute their valuable time and expertise to CNAR's strategy, programming, and events. From providing leadership and direction, to advising on impactful education opportunities, to helping us create an exceptional Annual National Conference, your volunteer service makes CNAR who we are.
WE THANK YOU!
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
BOARDCHAIR
AliceKennedy,BNMBA
FCCHLFCHSRF
Registrarand ChiefExecutiveOfficer, Newfoundland and Labrador Council of Health Professionals
TREASURER
LeighaHubick Registrar, Institute of Chartered Professional Accountants of Saskatchewan
DIRECTOR
DenithaBreau
RegistrarandCEO, Ontario College of Social Workers and Social Service Workers
DIRECTOR
IsabelleGonthier
ChiefAssessmentOfficer, Content Science at PSI Services LLC
DIRECTOR
MichaelRadano
ChiefExecutiveOfficer,B.C. Association of Clinical Counsellors
CNAR 2025 Volunteer Opportunities Open VOLUNTEER OPPORTUNITIES
VICE-CHAIR
Glenn Pettifer Registrar and Chief Executive Officer, College of Dental Hygienists of Ontario
DIRECTOR
Amit Banerjee, P.Eng. Director, The Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of Alberta
DIRECTOR
Margaret Drent
Registrar and CEO, College of Audiologists and Speech-Language Pathologists of Ontario
DIRECTOR
Sam Lanctin Principal, Sam Lanctin Consultant of Canada
DIRECTOR
Colleen Wetter Principal Lawyer Wetter Law
EDUCATION PROGRAM ADVISORY COMMITTEE (EPAC)
Erika Abner Lawyer
Chad Andrews Director of Research and Policy College of Optometrists of Ontario
Anita Ashton Deputy Registrar & Chief Regulatory Officer College of Physiotherapists of Ontario
Chris Beauchamp Vice President, Psychometrics Meazure Learning
Beth Deazeley Registrar & CEO College of Early Childhood Educators
Margaret Drent Registrar & CEO College of Audiologists and Speech-Language Pathologists of Ontario
Shelley Ball Lawyer Shelsu Pacific Consulting
Amit Banerjee Director, Registration Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of Alberta
Pattie LaCroix Director, Communications and Policy College of Physicians and Surgeons of Nova Scotia
Doha Melhem Vice President of Consulting and Chief Evaluator Pivotal Research Inc
Christine Nielsen CEO
Canadian Society for Medical Laboratory Science
Beata Pawlowska Director, Professional Standards, Research, Education, and Policy College of Immigration and Citizenship Consultants
Jennifer Slabodkin Director of Registration and Education, Deputy Registrar College of Patent Agents and Trademark Agents
Gillian Slaughter Director
Professional Conduct and Regulatory Affairs, Royal College of Dental Surgeons of Ontario
Greg Pope Psychometrician and Partner
Sprie Psychometrics, For Good Measure
Lindsay Steele Associate Director, Professional Practice Engineers and Geoscientists British Columbia
Stephanie Price Executive Director Federation of Medical Regulatory Authorities of Canada
Bernadette Santiago Investigator
Ontario College of Social Workers and Social Service Workers
Melanie Therrien Head of Licensing
Alberta Insurance Council
Communities of Practice
CNAR’s Communities of Practice
Program provides a forum for members to engage in dialogue on issues and practices, share resources, and meet peers with a shared interest in a particular area of regulatory practice. Members can connect and engage through dedicated spaces in the discussion forum in the member portal, at planned virtual events, and in-person at meet-and-greet discussions at the Annual National Conference.
JOIN THE CONVERSATION! ENTRY TO PRACTICE AND REGISTRATION COMMUNITY DISCUSSION FORUM
We welcome the community to use this discussion forum in the CNAR Community Portal to engage in thoughtful discussions and share resources on issues, challenges, opportunities, and initiatives in professional registration/licensure.
Topic areas of interest may include:
• Education and practice: Requirements and assessment methods.
• Labour mobility: Domestic and international trends, pressures, and opportunities.
• Registration practices and processes: Fairness and public protection.
• Relationships: Collaboration among regulators and with other organizations.
In 2025, this Community of Practice will be co-lead by Melanie Therrien, Head of Licensing, Alberta Insurance Council, and Amit Banerjee, Director, Registration, Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of Alberta (APEGA) and CNAR Board Director. Thank you for sharing your knowledge and experience with the community!
A NEW COMMUNITY OF PRACTICE: CONDUCT FORUM, LIVE NOW!
Topics areas of interest may include:
• Codes of conduct and what constitutes misconduct in the practice of professions
• Mechanisms to receive, assess, and investigate complaints and mandatory reports about registrants’ conduct, competence, or capacity to practice, and associated outcomes
• Matters related to discipline hearings, such as policies, practices, processes, outcomes, and associated issues
• Types of misconduct matters, relevant cases, and associated issues and trends
In 2025, this Community of Practice will be co-lead by Bernadette Santiago, Investigator, Complaints and Discipline, Ontario College of Social Workers and Social Service Workers and Erika Abner, Lawyer specializing in ethics and professionalism.
NAVIGATING TARIFF TURBULENCE: INSIGHTS FOR REGULATORS
Join us on May 12th for another CNAR Regulatory Roundtable event!
We often think about tariffs in terms of the trade of products. But the recent imposition and continued potential for tariffs is raising spin-off issues and questions for regulators of professions in Canada. Alongside the push to reduce barriers to interprovincial trade, there has been attention to labour mobility within Canada. In some sectors, there may be spin-off effects on professional practice if the flow of supplies, inputs, and products is reduced.
It’s early days in this new landscape and the situation remains very fluid. A panel of members from the regulatory community will discuss questions and issues regulators are dealing with in light of the tariff situation. Topics that may be explored are:
• Requirements and timelines for the review of labour mobility applications and issuance of registration.
• Potential implications for professional practice.
• Navigating differences in jurisdictional approaches and opportunities for harmonization.
• Issues to think about as circumstances continue to evolve.
This event is open to all, free of charge. Registration required.
Registration to close at 5 p.m. ET, May 9th, 2025.
Date: May 12, 2025
Time: 12:00 PM ET–1:00 PM ET
Venue: Zoom (link to be sent out prior to event)
REGISTER HERE
The conversation will be facilitated by: Chad Andrews Director of Research and Policy College of Optometrists of Ontario
Chad Andrews is the Director of Research and Policy at the College of Optometrists of Ontario (COO) as well as a researcher and policy analyst with a Ph.D. from Trent University’s Cultural Studies program. At COO, he works closely with Council members and staff to run Council sessions, conceptualize and steer a research grant program, and design and implement internal research projects that explore regulatory models, health technologies, access to care, and other issues. He engages in policy development in the areas of governance, ethical conduct, transparency, and more, and as a researcher, he looks at networks of literature, policy, and technology that emerged in postwar North America, particularly the development and oversight of regulatory systems, health technology assessment, and patientoriented paradigms. Chad’s work is informed by a history of collaborating with patients, organizations, and other stakeholders to achieve equitable access to healthcare.
Panelists are:
Dr. Sayra Khandekar
Assistant Registrar, Registration College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta
Dr. Sayra Khandekar is the Assistant Registrar for Registration at the College of Physicians & Surgeons of Alberta (CPSA). She graduated from Stanford University and Tulane University School of Medicine and completed post graduate training at the University of Tennessee and the University of Alberta. She has her MBA in Healthcare Leadership and Management from the University of Texas at Dallas. She is a cardiologist specialized in echocardiography and practiced at the Misericordia Hospital and the University of Alberta Hospital in Edmonton. She has held previous leadership roles at Covenant Health, the Edmonton Zone Medical Staff Association and Alberta Health Services with an interest in continuous quality improvement in healthcare.
Pal Mann CEO and Registrar Engineers Nova Scotia
Pal Mann is a civil engineering graduate of the Royal Military College, Class of 1987. He served for over 32 years with the Royal Canadian Engineers as a combat engineering officer, retiring in 2015. Service highlights included:
• Commandant of the Canadian Forces School of Military Engineering, which establishes and teaches the best models and practices for military engineering in the Canadian Armed Forces,
• Dean and Deputy Commandant of the Canadian Army Command and Staff College, and
• Commanding combat engineers with United Nations and NATO forces on two operational deployments to the Balkans in 1992 and 1997, providing combat and infrastructure engineering support to Canadian troops and partner nations.
Pal spent the next five years with the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of Alberta (APEGA) as:
• The Director, Corporate Services, responsible for supporting APEGA and other stakeholders, managing Finance, Human Resources, Information Technology and General Services, and
• The Director, Professional Practice responsible for establishing, enforcing, and advising on standards of practice and ethical conduct for the engineering and geoscience professions.
In February 2020, Pal joined Engineers Nova Scotia. As the CEO & Registrar, Pal is responsible to the elected Council to support the 9,200 engineers and engineers-in-training registered in Nova Scotia. He guides and resources the Engineers Nova Scotia to execute the Association’s strategic plan and support its day-to-day operations, all focused on fulfilling the Association’s regulatory obligations in the public interest of all Nova Scotians.
In 2022, Pal was honored to be appointed as a Fellow of the Canadian Society of Senior Engineers, and in 2023 he successfully
completed the ICD.D. program. He is on the Boards of the Royal Military Colleges Alumni Association and the Royal Military College Museum Corporation.
Wendy Moir CEO and Registrar Home Construction Regulatory Authority
Wendy Moir joined the Home Construction Regulatory Authority (HCRA) as CEO & Registrar in April 2021. Prior to joining the HCRA, Wendy served as the Vice-President and Registrar, Licensing and Consumer Services at BC Housing. Wendy has over 20 years of experience in the licensing and regulation of professionals, legislative and policy development, construction, housing, and consumer protection. She has led important initiatives to increase the quality of residential construction and strengthen consumer protection. Wendy has degrees in both law and political science from the University of Calgary.
Jennifer Quaglietta CEO and Registrar Professional Engineers Ontario
Jennifer Quaglietta is a transformational executive and systems leader with over 20 years of progressive executive leadership experience, committed to driving innovation, collaboration, and equity across sectors. As CEO & Registrar of Professional Engineers Ontario, she is leading one of Canada’s largest regulators through an ambitious modernization to strengthen public trust and uphold professional standards.
With a background spanning healthcare, government, pharma, insurance, and professional services, Jennifer has held senior roles at the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, HIROC, and North York General Hospital. She is recognized for her ability to pair operational excellence with human-centered leadership, delivering measurable, system-wide impact.
Jennifer brings deep expertise in corporate strategy, government relations, enterprise risk, and change management. She is a passionate advocate for women in STEM, diversity, mental health, and inclusive leadership. Her contributions have earned national recognition, including being named one of WXN’s Canada’s Most Powerful Women Top 100, the Robert Zed Young Health Leader Award, and Not-for-Profit CIO of the Year.
A sought-after speaker and board leader, Jennifer serves as Vice Chair of the Board at Holland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital and is a director on the board of the Ontario Medical Association. She has multiple advisory appointments given her expertise in AI, consensus building and strategic communications. Her passion for good governance is rooted in her board journey, supporting executive management in driving change. She lives in Toronto with her husband, two young sons, and their dog, Harry Potter.
Presenters
Greg Hutchinson B.Comm., Co-CEO
Greg has spent nearly 20 years conducting investigations into a broad range of complex concerns for regulators across Canada while also being steadfastly dedicated to building and supporting Barker Hutchinson’s sophisticated team of investigators who share his commitment to fairness, precision, and sensitivity. He works closely with regulators to ensure their employees have the training, skill and support needed to bring meaningful conclusions to investigations handled internally and assists with the development of their investigation policies and processes.
Greg frequently speaks at conferences and continuing education events. Beyond his work at Barker Hutchinson, Greg is the Administrator of the Workplace Investigator Network on LinkedIn, a space where professionals come together to share knowledge, engage in professional development, and elevate industry standards.
Rupa Karyampudi B.Sc., J.D., Senior Investigator
Rupa is a skilled lawyer and senior investigator who draws on more than a decade of experience conducting investigations, practising disability litigation, and employment and human rights law. Rupa conducts complex regulatory and workplace investigations into complaints of sexual abuse, professional misconduct, inappropriate billing, harassment and discrimination. She is skilled in conducting empathetic, impartial, trauma-informed interviews that respect the dignity of all parties and witnesses, analyzing large and complex sets of evidence, and producing clear, thorough reports.
Rupa leads with empathy and approaches each investigation with methodical, analytical expertise influenced through her scientific background. In addition to her legal investigative practice, Rupa is also deeply committed to community service. She has chaired an organization that empowers individuals with mental health challenges and served as a board member for a community legal aid clinic.
Sarah Niman
B.J., J.D., Investigator
Sarah draws on her experience as a human rights and Indigenous rights lawyer to conduct rigorous and balanced investigations with a trauma-informed approach for regulators across Canada.
Before joining Barker Hutchinson, she maintained a sole practice and was the senior director of legal services at a national Indigenous organization, where she developed equity, diversity, and inclusion programs and spearheaded efforts to improve psychological safety in the workplace.
With experience in employment law complaints proceedings, including mediations, as well as in addressing complaints of harassment, including gender-based discrimination, Sarah is dedicated to advancing equity in the workplace and beyond.
Session held on March 5, 2025
From Concept to Action: Establishing a Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) Working Group
KEY TAKEAWAYS
Here are some key takeaways that emerged from CNAR’s UnLearn & Learn Session ‘From Concept to Action: Establishing a Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) Working Group’ held on March 5, 2025. This session explored a lived story of how an advisory group was established and supported; the takeaways below are intended not to be read as a guidebook, but to share some of the learnings from this unique journey.
Thank you to Deborah Adams, Registrar & CEO, College of Registered Psychotherapists of Ontario and Darcy Belisle, Lawyer and DEI Consultant, Decibel DEI Consulting for sharing their journey with us.
• Identify and recognize need: The first step is recognizing regulators’ responsibility to meaningfully include perspectives of equitydeserving communities in regulatory decisionmaking. One initiative that can add substance to this recognition is the establishment of a DEI advisory group. Advisory groups can drive more equitable regulatory practices and simultaneously address systemic inequities, contributing to fairer outcomes.
• Make a commitment for long-term success and impact: A foundational investment in DEI – people, financial resources, and clear, lasting mandates from leaders – is crucial for long-term sustainability. Take stock of your college’s state of readiness and seek guidance on how to safely proceed before jumping ahead to recruitment. Acting too quickly can create barriers
to trust with and do harm to equity-deserving communities as well as seriously damage the reputation of your college.
• Integrate a preliminary, exploratory phase and adapt to member feedback: An exploratory phase could bring together board, committee, staff, registrants, public members, and others. It focuses on setting the strong conditions for the establishment of a long-lasting DEI advisory group. Emphasize flexibility in the process, allowing for the organic development of the exploratory group’s structure. Based on member feedback, consider opportunities to make tangible advances. One opportunity that members may endorse is the development of terms of reference. For both the exploratory group and a longer-term advisory group, terms of reference can be useful in setting out their critical goals, composition, scope, and governance structure.
• Recruitment with intention: Recruitment can be informed by the exploratory phase. When ready to start planning a recruitment process for a DEI working group, engage a DEI lens and remember that terms of reference can help to refocus the goals of recruitment. Be flexible with forms of submission, using a variety of channels such as email, video submissions, written forms and letters, and phone and in-person interviews. Also, be aware that requirements like previous experience as a board member can be a barrier to many potential members. Engaging a recruitment matrix, standardized processes, and objective screening tactics promote fair recruitment. Clearly
Bolstering Pathways to Practice: Empowering Internationally Educated Nurses in Canada
Nursing vacancies in Canada have increased by nearly 150% over the last five years, and shortages are expected to reach upwards of 100,000 positions by 2030. Yet only 42% of internationally educated nurses (IENs) in Canada are employed in the professional health care sector and face significant barriers surrounding licensure pathways and workplace support.
WES, in partnership with the Canadian Federation of Nurses Union (CFNU), Canada’s largest nurses’ organization, hosted a series of workshops with IENs from across Canada to hear firsthand the challenges they face reconnecting to their careers in the health care field and to gather their input on possible solutions. This report shares our findings, detailing the barriers to licensure faced by IENs and outlining eight actionable recommendations to bolster pathways to practice and foster a more inclusive and robust health care system in Canada.
Discover more original research, reports & policy recommendations about international education, newcomer economic inclusion & barriers to workforce integration available through the WES website.
As digital threats to exam security grow ever more sophisticated, so must our defenses. The stakes have never been higher and ID verification is just one example where we face a rapidly evolving landscape. Deepfakes and digital forgeries can challenge even the most robust security systems. To protect exam integrity, regulatory agencies and examination boards must go beyond reactive measures and embrace a proactive, threat-driven strategy.
This article explains how proxy testers and professional impersonators are using deepfakes and digital forgeries. Sharing how, by integrating AI into our already comprehensive exam security framework, we are enhancing our capability to detect and neutralize these evolving risks.
DEEPFAKES FOR PROXY TESTING
Deepfakes are rapidly emerging as one of the most formidable threats to exam security, through their use in proxy testing. These hyper-realistic digital forgeries employ advanced AI algorithms to generate lifelike images and videos that mimic human movements, behaviors, and facial expressions. With widely accessible software, a proxy tester can now create a convincing deepfake to impersonate a legitimate candidate during an online proctored exam.
As deepfake technology continues to advance, distinguishing between a real candidate and a digital imposter becomes increasingly challenging. This evolution not only threatens the validity of individual exams but also poses a significant risk to the integrity of entire credentials.
AI-DRIVEN DEEPFAKE DETECTION
As deepfakes are created using advanced AI algorithms, detecting them requires equally sophisticated AI-driven solutions. Deepfake detection algorithms work by analyzing subtle anomalies in facial features and movements – details that are often imperceptible to the human eye. These algorithms examine inconsistencies in freckles, unnatural head movements, irregular blinking patterns, or the absence of micro-expressions.
These detailed ‘liveness checks’ are critical indicators of genuine human presence and are exceptionally difficult for deepfakes to replicate. When AI detects such anomalies, it triggers an alert, notifying the proctor of a potential deepfake attempt and prompting further investigation. By using these advanced detection techniques, regulatory agencies can stay one step ahead of increasingly sophisticated digital impersonation tactics.
DIGITAL FORGERY FOR FAKE ID
Another growing threat is digital document forgery, now the leading method of fraud having surpassed physical counterfeits for the first time in 2024. According to PSI partner Entrust, digital forgeries accounted for 57% of all document fraud in 2024. This is a staggering 244% increase from 2023 and an astounding 1,600% surge since 2021, when nearly all fraudulent documents were physical counterfeits.1
The rise of AI-assisted fraud has enabled proxy test takers to craft increasingly sophisticated fake identification documents, making it easier to bypass traditional security measures. National ID cards are particularly vulnerable, representing 40.8% of global digital forgeries. As these advanced counterfeits grow more convincing, they pose a serious threat to the integrity of identity verification and, by extension, the credibility of high stakes testing.
COMBATTING DIGITAL DOCUMENT FORGERY
To counter the growing threat of digital document forgery, advanced ID verification employs multilayered biometric checks powered by AI. These systems capture a range of unique human characteristics that are almost impossible to fake, ensuring the authenticity of a candidate’s identity. Key components include:
• Face similarity detector – Captures the candidate’s facial image using their webcam during registration, comparing it to official photo ID to verify identity.
• Keystroke (typing) similarity detector –Records typing patterns as the candidate enters
1 Entrust Cybersecurity Institute, 2025 Identity Fraud Report.
Person-Centered Approach Asks Us as Investigators to Check Ourselves
By Barker Hutchinson
During a recent interview, I detected telltale nervousness signs: fast speech, fidgeting hands and frequent interruptions. This is typical, but it was beginning to stifle the evidence he was there to provide. I reminded him what we discussed ahead of the interview: That his side of the story was important to share, and that he could rely on the notes he prepared ahead of time to ground himself during his interview. While he likely remained nervous, he slowed down, reviewed his notes, and shared his story.
Most people taking part in an investigation find them uncomfortable, scary and unfamiliar. This unease can run from sweaty palms and fast heart rate all the way to visceral overwhelm and panic. As investigators, we realized we needed to account for this or risk gathering sub-par, unreliable evidence.
Enter the Person-Centered approach to investigations: Person-Centered investigations directly address the participation barriers people face to providing useful, detailed evidence. This approach asks us to depart from traditional, system-based interview plans, and instead figure out how to help each person feel comfortable providing their evidence.
Person-Centered care is gaining traction among healthcare professionals and advocacy groups, but investigators are just starting to integrate this approach into our interviews.
A Person-Centered approach is not just a nice aspiration, it aligns with each person’s fundamental right to a fair investigation. A tenet of our legal system is to gather and consider evidence directly relevant to what the person did or did not do, not limited by barriers witnesses may face in providing that evidence in the first place.
Since evidence plays a truth-seeking function in investigations, an investigator must adapt and build our practices to reflect research-based approaches that improve evidence collection, including PersonCentered interviews.
Person-Centered care took root when the US-based advocacy group Administration for Community Living (ACL) coined the term “person-centered, trauma-informed,” (PCTI) in 2015 to describe its goal to promote dignity, strength, and empowerment by considering the trauma in peoples’ lives into the agency’s programs, policies, and procedures.
Zarabi-Majd and the Duty to Accommodate
NatashaNovacandMalloryCramp-Waldinsperger
INTRODUCTION
In Zarabi-Majd, released in January 2025, the Divisional Court weighed in on whether the Toronto Police Services (“TPS”) Disciplinary Tribunal adequately accommodated a member with disabilities during the hearing process.1 The Court concluded that the applicant, a police officer facing insubordination and discreditable conduct charges, had been offered adequate accommodations by the Hearing Officer, and emphasized that the process of finding reasonable accommodations must be collaborative between both parties.2
Zarabi-Majd gives us an opportunity to refresh and review the duty to accommodate in the context of self-regulating professions. In this article, we offer
a brief case comment on Zarabi-Majd and discuss the duty to accommodate in the context of discipline hearings. We also offer a broader perspective on duty to accommodate issues that can arise in the context of registration. Under section 6 of the Ontario Human Rights Code (the “Code”), every person has a right to equal treatment with respect to membership in an “occupational association or self-governing profession” without discrimination, including based on disability.3 While our focus is on the duty to accommodate as it applies to health professions colleges governed by the Regulated Health Professions Act4, every regulator should be knowledgeable about its duty to accommodate under the Code and what to do when the duty arises.
DISCIPLINE
i. Zarabi-Majd
The applicant in Zarabi-Majd was a police officer with the TPS. She went on medical leave in 2018 after being diagnosed with PTSD. While on leave, she posted comments on Twitter about experiences she had had as a member of the force. The force considered the applicant’s online comments to be inflammatory and she disobeyed several orders to stop posting comments online5. The applicant was charged with several counts of insubordination and discreditable conduct under the Police Services Act (now the Community Safety and Policing Act).6 A three-day discipline hearing was scheduled.
Several months before the discipline hearing was to proceed, the applicant brought two motions to adjourn sine die. Her position was that, as a result of her health condition, she was too sick to attend the hearing. The Hearing Officer denied both requests and found that while the applicant did suffer from PTSD, her health conditions did not prevent her from participating in the hearing.7 The hearing proceeded without the applicant in attendance. She was found guilty of misconduct and was dismissed from the service. The applicant’s appeal to the Ontario Civilian Police Commission was dismissed in April 2024. The applicant sought judicial review before the Divisional Court, which dismissed the application and upheld the adjournment rulings.8
One of the applicant’s grounds of judicial review was that the Hearing Officer had breached the applicant’s right to be accommodated at the hearing.9 The parties did not dispute the fact that that the applicant had PTSD, but disagreed about whether that meant she was unable to participate in the hearing.10 Prior to the hearing, the applicant took the position that the only reasonable accommodation of her health condition was an indefinite adjournment. The Hearing Officer rejected that position and found that the applicant was using her health condition as an opportunity to “avoid being held accountable for her conduct.”11
Before the Divisional Court, the applicant did not challenge the Hearing Officer’s findings that she had a disability or that her disability did not prevent her from participating in the hearing. She also did
not challenge the Commission’s decision to uphold the adjournment rulings. Her position was that, having found that she had PTSD, the Hearing Officer failed to offer to provide her with other adequate forms of accommodation, such as granting an adjournment for a specific length of time or allowing her to respond to written questions instead of giving viva voce evidence.
The Divisional Court found that the Hearing Officer had reasonably accommodated the applicant.12 First, the Court noted that the duty to accommodate is not triggered merely by the fact that a party before a discipline tribunal has a disability. Rather, the duty to accommodate will come into play when there is a finding that the party’s ability to access the service of the tribunal will be adversely affected by that disability (i.e., the core dispute between the parties in this case)13. The Hearing Officer concluded that the applicant’s disability did not prevent her from participating in the hearing and the applicant did not challenge that finding upon judicial review.14 Nevertheless, after making that finding and dismissing the applicant’s request for an indefinite adjournment, the Hearing Officer sought to initiate a process of finding suitable accommodations. The Hearing Officer wrote to the applicant to engage her in a discussion about what other accommodations might be appropriate, including by sending the following email:
There are many options we can explore to ensure Constable Zarabi-Majd’s needs are met. For example, would she prefer to participate virtually or in person? Would she like a hybrid approach to this option, i.e., half virtual / half in person? If in person, would she prefer we utilize a tribunal room outside a Toronto Police Service facility? Does the start time of 0900hr need to be adjusted? Would she like me to adjust the tribunal hours to afternoons or evenings? Would she like us to build a schedule which indicates breaks per every hour or two? Would she prefer to see participating police officers in civilian attire as opposed to uniform? With respect to providing evidence, Constable Zarabi-Majd can achieve this through her representative, as she has done to date - or perhaps there
is another idea in this regard I have not considered. These are just a few options that come to mind. It is certainly not an exhaustive list, but it should give you some idea as to the flexibility the tribunal has.15
The applicant did not respond to this email, and after a follow-up took the position that the only reasonable accommodation would be the indefinite adjournment.16 In its reasons for decision, the Divisional Court emphasized that the process of devising appropriate accommodations for a healthrelated disability must be collaborative and that the person seeking accommodation must participate in the process.17 The accommodation-seeking person also has an obligation to accept reasonable accommodations that are offered.18 The Court did not say directly whether a duty to accommodate was owed in the circumstances, given the Hearing Officer’s unchallenged finding that the applicant’s disability did not hinder her participation before the Tribunal. Nevertheless, the Court concluded that to the extent that the Tribunal did have a duty to accommodate, it had adequately discharged its obligation by proposing a variety of accommodations and remaining open to other suggestions from the applicant herself.19 There had been no breach of the duty and the Commission’s finding that the Hearing Officer had not breached that duty had been reasonable.20
Zarabi-Majd is noteworthy not only as the latest decision from the Divisional Court on the duty to accommodate before discipline tribunals, but also because of the Court’s emphasis on the roles and responsibilities of the applicant seeking an accommodation. The Hearing Officer’s email, reproduced in full in the decision, also provides regulators with a helpful example of a tribunal working nimbly to maximize the procedural flexibility available to it to accommodate a member with a disability.
REGISTRATION
In Zarabi-Majd, the duty to accommodate arose in a discipline proceeding. However, the duty to accommodate may arise in a variety of regulatory processes. For example, accommodation may arise at the very beginning of a person’s engagement with a regulator, during registration.
It is long established that there is no right to become registered or to practice a profession.21 An applicant seeking licensure holds the burden to show that they meet the requirements for registration into the profession they are seeking to enter. That said, regulators’ duties under the Code include a duty to accommodate applicants with disabilities who are going through the registration process.
In Maksoud v College of Physiotherapists of Ontario, the Health Professions Review and Appeal Board (“HPARB”) considered whether an applicant to the College of Physiotherapists of Ontario had been adequately accommodated during registration.22 In the underlying decision, the College refused to issue the applicant an Independent Practice Certificate of Registration. The applicant had been diagnosed with bilateral, moderate sensorineural hearing loss. He had received accommodations for his second and third attempts at the practical Physiotherapy Competency Examination (“PCE”) but had not passed. Before the HPARB, the applicant advanced three arguments: the requirement that he successfully complete the clinical PCE was discriminatory; the examination inherently placed hearing-disabled individuals at a disadvantage; and he had not received appropriate accommodation.23
The HPARB accepted the applicant’s submissions that he had a Code-protected characteristic (i.e., a disability) and had experienced an adverse impact in which his disability was a factor. It also found that the College had reasonably accommodated the applicant.24 The HPARB concluded that the accommodations granted to the applicant during the clinical PCE had been reasonable. These included providing him with a digital timer for use at any station where a stethoscope was required and allowing him to carry additional batteries for his hearing aids in the event that the first set of batteries failed.25
After concluding that the College had not breached the Code in respect of accommodating the applicant, the HPARB went on to consider the applicant’s submission that the registration requirement itself was discriminatory in respect of hearingdisabled individuals. The HPARB found that that the requirement to pass the clinical PCE was not discriminatory for two reasons: 1) it was justified in light of the College’s public protection mandate, and
2) the applicant had been reasonably accommodated during the examination process.26 In concluding that the clinical PCE requirement was justified, the HPARB relied by analogy on another HPARB decision in a nursing case, Caliao, in which the panel applied an adapted version of the Supreme Court of Canada test from Meoirin for whether an allegedly discriminatory workplace duty or rule is bona fide occupational requirement.27 In its application of the adapted Meoirin test, the panel in Caliao reasoned that the registration requirement at issue in that case was justified because:
• The regulatory requirement (that an applicant pass a national nursing examination in three attempts) is rationally connected to membership in the nursing profession;
• There was no basis for expecting that the requirement was not adopted in good faith; and
• The requirement that applicants demonstrate baseline proficiency within three attempts at an examination is reasonably necessary to accomplish the purpose of public protection under the Regulated Health Professions Act, the Health Professions Procedural Code, and the Nursing Act.
• The HPARB drew the same conclusions in Maksoud with respect to the clinical PCE.
Maksoud is consistent with the now longstanding approach to the duty to accommodate in registration for the regulated health professions. In Trozzi, the leading case from the Divisional Court on the duty to accommodate in the context of registration, the Court concluded that “accommodation up to the point of undue hardship” in the context of the RHPA colleges means “reasonable accommodation consistent with public protection in health care.”28 This standard is different than the standard for undue hardship under the Human Rights Code, and reflects the fact that health professions colleges must balance the duty to accommodate with their broader mandate to protect the public.29 Registration is meant to ensure that individuals who become licensed are qualified, skilled and competent.30 The adapted standard reflects the careful balancing that must be done between those two priorities.
CONCLUDING THOUGHTS
Ultimately, the Divisional Court’s decision in ZarabiMajd reminds us that tribunals can and should take advantage of the procedural flexibility afforded to them when the need arises to accommodate a member with a disability before a discipline tribunal. Colleges and regulators can also apply this lesson in the context of registration, while ensuring that the end result is consistent with the statutory mandate of public protection in health care.
1 Zarabi-Majd v Toronto Police Service, 2025 ONSC 277 [ZarabiMajd].
2 Zarabi-Majd, supra at para. 18
3 Human Rights Code, RSO 1990, c H 19, s 6.
4 Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, SO 1991 c 18
5 Zarabi-Majd, supra at para. 2.
6 Police Services Act, RSO 1990 c P 15 as repealed by Community Safety and Policing Act, 2019, SO 2019
7 Zarabi-Majd, supra at para. 4
8 Zarabi-Majd, supra at para. 11.
9 Zarabi-Majd, supra at para. 7.
10 Zarabi-Majd, supra at para. 10
11 Zarabi-Majd, supra at para. 10.
12 Zarabi-Majd, supra at paras. 12 and 17
13 Zarabi-Majd, supra at para. 9
14 Zarabi-Majd, supra at para. 18
15 Zarabi-Majd, supra at para. 13
16 Zarabi-Majd, supra at paras. 15-16
17 Zarabi-Majd, supra at para. 18, citing Simpson v Commissionaires (Great Lakes), 2009 HRTO 1362 at paras. 35-36.
18 Zarabi-Majd, supra at para. 18, citing Central Okanagan School District No. 23 v Renaud, [1992] 2 S.C.R. 970 at pp. 994-995.
19 Zarabi-Majd, supra at para. 18.
20 Zarabi-Majd, supra at para. 18.
21 K.k. v College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, 2018 CanLII 75372 (ON HPARB) at para. 50; Chauhan v Health Professions Appeal and Review Board, 2013 ONSC 1621
22 Maksoud v College of Physiotherapists of Ontario, 2023 CanLII 15019 (ON HPARB) [Maksoud].
23 Maksoud, supra, at para. 122.
24 Maksoud, supra, at para. 129
25 Maksoud, supra, at paras. 131-137.
26 Maksoud, supra, at para. 129
27 Maksoud, supra, at para. 130, citing Caliao v College of Nurses of Ontario, 2011 CanLII 90733 at paras. 38-39 and British Columbia (Public Service Employee Relations Commission) v BCGSEU (“Meoirin”), [1999] 3 S.C.R. 3
28 College of Nurses v. Trozzi, 2011 ONSC 4614 at para. 42 [Trozzi].
29 See Trozzi, supra, at paras. 36, 42
30 See e.g., Health Professions Procedural Code, schedule II to the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, SO 1991 c 18 at s. 2.1
The Investigator’s Intuition: Balancing Gut Feelings with Analytical Thinking
By Dean Benard
In the world of investigations, we spend a lot of time talking about facts, evidence, and objectivity. And rightly so—our credibility depends on it. But there’s another tool that seasoned investigators lean on, one that’s often harder to explain but just as valuable: intuition.
That instinctive feeling that something isn’t quite right, the sense that a witness is holding back, or the immediate skepticism when a story sounds a little too rehearsed—these aren’t just hunches. They’re the result of years of experience, pattern recognition, and subconscious data processing.
But here’s the catch: intuition alone isn’t enough. It can steer us in the right direction, but it can also lead us astray if we’re not careful. Investigators need to balance their instincts with structured analysis, evidence, and critical thinking to ensure fair, defensible, and professional investigations.
WHAT IS INTUITION IN INVESTIGATIONS?
Intuition is often described as a “gut feeling,” but in reality, it’s your brain recognizing patterns before you consciously put the pieces together. It’s
that moment when you sense that an interviewee is being deceptive, even though you can’t immediately say why.
Think about it: after conducting hundreds of interviews, your brain has absorbed a massive amount of information about how people behave when they’re truthful, when they’re lying, and when they’re uncomfortable but not necessarily dishonest. Over time, you start noticing small cues—micro expressions, tone shifts, pauses—that trigger an internal alarm.
When does intuition help?
• It flags inconsistencies in statements that require further probing.
• It helps detect non-verbal cues that may indicate deception or discomfort.
• It pushes you to ask follow-up questions when something doesn’t add up.
• It can be an early warning system, alerting you that something needs a closer look.
But intuition is only useful when it leads to more questioning and fact-finding, not when it dictates conclusions.
THE PROBLEM WITH RELYING TOO MUCH ON INTUITION
Intuition is powerful, but it’s also flawed. It’s shaped by our experiences, biases, and personal perceptions, which means it can lead us in the wrong direction if we’re not careful. Here’s where things get tricky. The very same brain processes that allow us to “sense” when something is off can also trap us into confirmation bias—where we start looking for evidence that supports our gut feeling while ignoring anything that contradicts it.
COMMON BIASES THAT CAN MISLEAD INVESTIGATORS:
• Confirmation Bias – Once we suspect something, we unconsciously focus on evidence that proves we’re right.
• Anchoring Bias – We put too much weight on the first piece of information we receive.
• Attribution Error – We assume someone’s behavior is due to their character rather than their circumstances.
• Availability Bias – We rely on what comes to mind quickly, rather than what is most accurate.
An investigator who blindly follows intuition without applying critical thinking and structured analysis is on a slippery slope.
WHEN TO USE INTUITION AND WHEN TO RELY ON FACTS
The best investigators know how to blend their instincts with analytical thinking. The trick is knowing when to trust your gut and when to step back and rely on facts.
When Intuition Helps:
• During interviews – Picking up on discomfort, evasion, or signs that someone isn’t being completely honest.
• Recognizing patterns – Spotting fraud schemes, misconduct trends, or behavioural indicators based on past cases.
• Directing next steps – Using gut instinct as a signal to dig deeper into certain areas.
When to Set Intuition Aside and Rely on Evidence:
• Evaluating credibility formally – In most professional regulation settings – formal credibility assessment is not part of the process – but even where it is, credibility assessments should be based on consistency, corroboration, and facts, not just a feeling.
• Making final determinations – Decision makers, typically not the investigator should make decisions that are backed by solid evidence, not a feeling or gut instinct.
• Writing reports – Reports must be objective, defensible, and rooted in fact, not intuition. In regulatory settings reports should not contain opinions or assessment of credibility.
Intuition should help guide the process, not dictate the outcome.
Can AI Be Ethical?
What to Know for Assessments
An introduction for assessment professionals who believe in creating a better world by using AI responsibly
THE POTENTIAL OF AI IS LIMITLESS
AI is rapidly transforming assessments in big ways, from accelerating exam development and streamlining alignment and even scoring exam results to screening SME talent. But there are some serious concerns we can’t ignore if want to continue benefitting from the potential of AI. If we’re not careful, AI could harm the things we value most in skills development and certification, like creativity, problem-solving, and critical thinking.
“This isn’t just about using technology; it’s about doing what’s right.”
ENTER THE AGE OF ETHICAL AI
To use AI responsibly, it should help humans, not replace them. AI can take care of repetitive tasks, so SMEs have more time to build high quality, personalized assessment experiences. But for this to work, everyone needs to understand how AI systems work, what AI can and can’t do, and how decisions are made.
This isn’t just about using technology; it’s about doing what’s right. The choices we make today will decide how AI shapes the future of work. AI can make the world of credentialing and assessment better for everyone if we make the right decisions now.
But where should you start? In this guide, we’ll provide you with practical approaches for responsibly innovating with AI and present basic rules to follow so you can set AI up as a tool to empower humans and teams, not replace them.
ETHICAL AI DEPENDS ON AI GOVERNANCE
How can you reduce risks while getting the most out of what AI has to offer?
Invest in AI governance. Here we’ll explore the three Ts of AI governance to help you ensure AI is created and used in a responsible, ethical, and transparent way in your program.
THE THREE TS OF AI GOVERNANCE
1 Talent
Launch an organization-wide AI literacy training program to upskill everyone
2 Technology
Document all AI tools and models as well as the systems in which they’re used
3 Transparency
Create an ethical AI oversight committee that can develop and manage a complete AI governance framework
AI LITERACY TRAINING EMPOWERS TALENT TO USE AI ETHICALLY
Training your team to navigate AI is about more than just learning the tech—it’s about fostering ethical practices, building trust, and avoiding pitfalls like overuse or misuse. When everyone understands how AI works and its limitations, the entire team is better equipped to innovate thoughtfully and responsibly. Clear communication and training aren’t just nice to have—they’re essential for keeping up with AI’s rapid advancements. Done right, an AI training program doesn’t just prepare your team for what’s next; it creates a culture of ethical innovation and continuous growth, ensuring AI becomes a tool for progress, not problems.
START AI LITERACY TRAINING WITH MICROCREDENTIALS
If you’re not ready to launch an organization-wide AI literacy training program, you can start by inviting select team members or SMEs to build foundational AI knowledge with microcredentials.
LEARN MORE
INNOVATE RESPONSIBLY WITH THE BEST OF BOTH WORLDS
If we’re smart about what we let AI handle and what we keep in human hands, we can tap into its amazing potential without losing the skills and values that make us, well, human. It’s all about making AI a tool to enhance what we do, not replace our creativity and ingenuity.
Prometric is more than a global leader in credentialing and skills development. We are a trusted partner in your success, leveraging 30 years of assessment expertise, innovation with advanced AI, and industryleading solutions to provide pathways for tomorrow’s workforce to succeed.
PARTNER WITH US
SAVE THE DATE
CNAR 2026: Mark Your Calendars!
CNAR's 2026 Annual Conference will take place in Montreal, Quebec, October 5th-7th, 2026!
We look forward to seeing you there!
CNAR Community Benefits
SAVE
Save on events, including the annual Conference, Regulatory Roundtable Series, webinars, and biannual workshops.
CONNECT
Connect with key regulatory influencers across Canada through our events, community directory, discussion forums, Regulatory Roundtable Series, and Job Bank.
SHARE
Share your knowledge and experience for the betterment of self-regulation in Canada. Submit articles in CNAR's Networks News magazine, join CNAR Committees, and receive early notice of speaking opportunities at CNAR events.
LEARN
Enhance your professional development and further your knowledge of self regulation by continuously connecting and learning from both experts and diverse peers from across Canada working in a variety of different professions. Make the Most of Your Membership!
As part of your membership benefits,
and your
Job Bank
CNAR members, Partners, and Suppliers can post and view jobs anytime, free of charge!
The following positions are currently active in the Job Bank located in the CNAR portal:
ALBERTA
• Coordinator, Member Registrations (Edmonton or Calgary)
• Student Services and Advising Coordinator (Practical Experience Coordinator) (Edmonton)
• Coordinator, Tribunals (Edmonton or Calgary)
BRITISH COLUMBIA
• Education Consultant (Vancouver)
• Intake Coordinator (Vancouver)
• Professional Conduct Review Consultant (Vancouver)
ONTARIO
• Inspector (Toronto)
To contribute content or subscribe to CNAR’s NETWORK NEWS, please contact Alana Coleman, Director, Marketing and Communications, at acoleman@cnar-rcor.ca.
