3. Findings

a) User experiences

Overall, the tribunal users interviewed expressed having very positive experiences with the SST Navigator Service. The researchers repeatedly heard glowing expressions of gratitude by users for the work that their navigators did for them. Several indicated that their navigator explained clearly and effectively what needed to be done and were thankful for a service that made the system less foreign and complex. One metaphor that was used to describe the valuable work of the navigator was that the navigator clears a path for the appellant who starts off at a deficit and faces a number of roadblocks that they could not even anticipate because they had never been there before. Navigators were highly praised not only for the substantive work that they did in preparing users for their hearings, but also for their responsiveness. As one interviewee stated: “The responsiveness is just outstanding.”

A number of interviewees had several different legal processes taking place simultaneously in their lives, including their appeal before the SST. These legal processes included working through private insurance claims and trying to obtain funding from their provincial social assistance administrative regime. This made the SST process an additional burden to go through, especially if one had to do it on their own. Similarly, all the appellants were dealing with their appeal at the same time as taking care of themselves and the medical issues that brought them to apply for CPP-Disability benefits. Because of these stressful life circumstances, they appreciated having their navigator’s services.

In terms of general elements to improve, a repeated concern was that there was a significant amount of paperwork. More than one interviewee mentioned that there were upwards of 1,000 pages for their file. Although they appreciated the organizational efforts of their navigators, including numbering each of the documents before sending them to the appellants, they stated that it was overwhelming to go through all the paperwork to make sure that they were prepared. The users experienced numerous difficulties related to physical and literacy challenges. Physically, having the ability and time to go through all of the paperwork posed a barrier for some, often but not exclusively because of their medical conditions. Others suggested that it was psychologically disturbing to see the comments made by doctors about them, especially if they did not agree with diagnoses or how they had been made. For many, it was also difficult to have to print off this paperwork due to financial costs and logistical reasons. Many tribunal users did not have printers.

The extent to which there should be reliance on friends and family of the appellants/users to assist with the Navigator Service is an important question that arose through the interviews. This question came up with respect to appellants who experienced literacy challenges. A number of interviewees indicated that they did not have relatives, support workers or others in the home who could assist with sorting through papers, filling out paperwork, etc. A similar issue arose for those who did not speak English or French fluently. For these users, the quality of the service they received depended on whether they had at-home assistance with language interpretation when speaking with navigators on the telephone. In the opinion of the researchers, it would be wise to provide navigational services in additional languages, including sign language interpretation, and to consider collaborating with community organizations that may be able to provide additional in-home assistance with the handling of paperwork and other service delivery tasks.

Through discussions with interviewees, a suggestion was also made that the navigators could initially present themselves by emphasizing that they are there to help as opposed to the legal limitations of what they cannot do. The users/appellants realize that there are limitations on the service that the navigators can provide, but the relationship could start off on a more empathetic note in some cases with more emphasis on how they can help before entering into what they cannot do.

In addition to these general suggestions for improvement, a number of notable themes emerged from interviews with navigated appellants. We found that these themes reflect some of the most important lived experiences of tribunal users and can be used to help shape the future institutional design of the Navigator Service. The themes include assisting users to understand what they have to prove to the tribunal, providing emotional support, and dealing with perceived pressure from insurance companies. With respect to users from marginalized communities, themes raised dealt with the experience of being newly disabled, user perceptions of disability, experiences of perceived systemic inequity within the healthcare system and lack of familiarity with government departments.

b) Navigator perspectives

All navigators with whom we spoke expressed passion and enthusiasm about their work. They found their role meaningful and saw it as an important one that makes a difference in access to the appeal process. They described the objective of the Navigator Service in the following terms: explaining the appeal process, giving the right information, providing guidance, educating the appellants, being their resource person, building their confidence, and helping them gain control of their file. Even though during the pandemic navigators conducted their work remotely, they emphasized the value of a supportive peer network and the availability of Tribunal management. While they gave numerous rewarding examples of their experiences with the users, they also described the emotionally taxing aspects of their job.

While some navigators shared their experiences of providing support to users from marginalized communities, others saw marginalization as a condition shared by all appellants they have served rather than attributing it to certain groups. This perception is in line with the intentions of the government officials who were in charge of the creation of Navigation Service in order to help all appellants who lack a professional representative.

The principal three themes navigators developed during interviews deal with their perceptions of access to justice and marginalization, their relations with peers and management and the challenges of the navigator role.

The interviews with the navigators allowed us to identify three main ways in which they help tribunal users’ access to justice, explaining the appeal process and the key criteria, empowering the users through information, and facilitating the hearing process.

Navigators expressed very positive views regarding the training they received. They explained the contribution of the peer-to-peer training model, as well as small group discussions for the preparation of their role. They stressed that this model facilitated their learning and contributed to exchanges among navigators.

Regularly mentioned in the interviews was the availability of Tribunal management for the navigators’ questions and comments. Collectively, navigators believed opportunities for harmonious exchanges among peers and the management allowed them to talk through their experiences with peers and discuss different possibilities for improvement.

The most common challenge navigators mentioned concerned users who refused to listen and were uncooperative during the call. Even though they felt uncomfortable during these calls, they felt that their training prepared them to handle these situations.

Navigators also offered the following suggestions for improving the service:

  1. Diversifying and enhancing mental health services for the navigators,
  2. Having bilingual navigators who speak languages other than English or French
  3. Creating an infographic that explains the steps and the duration of the appeal process,
  4. Providing users other means for filing their documents (such as video recording),
  5. Fostering the training program for Tribunal members to eliminate bias.