Warning: This petition could be triggering to some people. It deals with sensitive issues about resident care safety in long-term care (LTC). All readers are asked to keep this in mind and to please be respectful in the ways this petition is discussed. Please be respectful towards the people who can make this petition request happen.

1) For the readers who like getting right to the point - here's the requested change:

We, the people of Saskatchewan, are calling on the Government of Saskatchewan and all current and future elected Members of the Legislative Assembly (MLAs) to update Section 1.3.2.d of the Saskatchewan Program Guidelines for Special Care Homes (LTC standards) to state:

“All care staff who provide care to a resident must read and understand that resident’s current care plan. The resident and the resident’s responsible person must have access to the current care plan.”

We, the people of Saskatchewan, are asking all current MLAs to make their position public so their constituents know where they stand before this change is discussed by the government.

This change is necessary and long overdue. Resident safety is non-negotiable. Elected officials have the power - and duty - to fix this. This is an opportunity for Saskatchewan to lead in healthcare.

Please sign this petition if you agree!

Please share this petition! 

Please try to get 3 family members or friends to also sign it!

Further information is provided below to answer questions.

______________________________________________________________________________

Here are the details of this petition - some parts have been added based on questions/responses to this petition:

2) Imagine...

Imagine your mother or grandfather in LTC. A new staff member doesn’t know they have a medical condition that makes it hard to swallow - and gives them food or medications in a way that could choke them. This is exactly what care plans are meant to prevent.

Imagine your sister in LTC. She has cognitive disabilities that require specific behavioral support from staff to be safe, especially during care procedures like medications and assisted feeding. Staff come to work with her and don’t know this. She is harmed as a result. This is why care plans exist.

Imagine you are in LTC because of being in a car accident. You are unable to use a call bell for help. Your care plan identifies that risk and instructs staff to supervise you frequently. The staff working do not know this. You need help and cannot use the call bell. You do not get help and are harmed as a result. Care plans exist to stop scenarios like this before they happen.

There are all kinds of examples of how care plans protect residents and staff.

3) Who is this petition advocating for?

Most people of Saskatchewan are affected by this issue one way or another. Many of us have had, have, or will have a family member or friend living in LTC. Some of us live in LTC. Some of us may end up living in LTC one day. People live in LTC for many reasons, not only because of age.

This issue directly impacts thousands of Saskatchewan residents living in LTC.

4) What is this petition about?

The Saskatchewan Facility Designation Regulations require that all special care homes and other designated facilities (hospitals, health centres, community beds) that provide LTC shall offer LTC following the Saskatchewan Program Guidelines for Special Care Homes, which may be referred to as "LTC standards” going forward.

5) What is the problem?

The current LTC standards about resident care plans are negligent, unsafe, and allow avoidable safety risks for residents, especially residents unable to self-advocate. 

6) What is a resident care plan? 

It is one of the most important documents that protects every resident. It is like a manual for each resident’s safety and specific needs. Each resident has one. No resident is the same. When staff change or when new staff are hired, it makes sure a resident's needs are still met and important things are respected. It makes sure staff are trained properly. It makes sure staff have the appropriate knowledge to work with each resident. It prevents avoidable known risks for each resident.

It also protects staff. It provides direction so staff are more confident. It reduces staff stress because it avoids crisis, saves a lot of time on documenting incident reports, and avoids long follow-up steps of investigations.

7) What needs to change?

The current wording of the LTC standards, in Section 1.3.2.d, states: "All care staff involved with the resident’s care, the resident and their responsible person must have access to the care plan."

This basically means that, although care plans are important, staff do not have to read them. What is the point of having a care plan if staff aren't required and supported to read it? This makes care plans more for show and less for care.

Although many staff in care settings receive different kinds of post-secondary education, the care plans help provide the necessary resident-specific training for staff to have the competence and skills to work with each individual resident under their care safely.

8) What is the solution? What is this petition asking for? (This was already at the beginning of this petition in part 1.)

We, the people of Saskatchewan, are calling on the Government of Saskatchewan and all current and future elected Members of the Legislative Assembly (MLAs) to update Section 1.3.2.d of the Saskatchewan Program Guidelines for Special Care Homes (LTC standards) to state:

“All care staff who provide care to a resident must read and understand that resident’s current care plan. The resident and the resident’s responsible person must have access to the current care plan.”

We, the people of Saskatchewan, are asking all current MLAs to make their position public so their constituents know where they stand before this change is discussed by the government.

9) My LTC setting already expects staff to be reading the resident care plans. Why is this requested change still important?

Many LTC settings do encourage and expect staff to read resident care plans, which is good. However, there are often no mechanisms to verify and measure that it’s actually happening. It too often relies on good faith alone. This allows it not to be done, and it sometimes isn't done for different reasons. Having it as a provincial standard is necessary. It would make it mandatory, more measurable, and auditable throughout Saskatchewan.

10) Don’t healthcare professional regulatory bodies already expect LTC staff to read resident care plans?

This has been a common and excellent response to this petition. In LTC settings, many kinds of staff provide care to residents. Some are regulated and overseen by regulatory bodies, like registered nurses and licensed practical nurses - while others, like continuing care assistants, are not. Regulated staff might be encouraged or expected to read care plans, but their professional standards, guidelines, and codes of ethics might not clearly state documentation of reading care plans as mandatory. Regulatory bodies also act on complaints, commonly after safety incidents have occurred - many residents do not have the capacity to make those complaints if their care plans are not being read and followed properly. For unregulated staff, there is no such professional regulatory body at all. 

Unregulated staff also make up a large portion of staff in many LTC settings. They are often overseen by only 1 registered nurse responsible for 40+ residents and care teams.

This is exactly why a provincial standard is necessary. It would set one clear, enforceable expectation for all staff who provide resident care within their scopes of practice.

Staff already document medications given and other important care procedures. Reading and understanding the care plan is one of the most important stages of care. It must be documented, supported, and enforced with the same seriousness.

11) Aren't the Saskatchewan Program Guidelines for Special Care Homes the most minimal LTC standards that must be followed?

Yes. The requested change of this petition should be a minimal standard. Care staff should always have read and understood care plans before working with residents. Failure to do so can create resident harm and can cost residents' lives.

12) Who is my elected MLA? What is my constituency? 

The MLAs make up the provincial government leadership. A list of every MLA and every constituency (the mapped-out area of Saskatchewan each MLA is elected in) can be found here. For anyone wondering what their constituency is, that can be found here.

For example, anyone living in the constituency of Rosthern‑Shellbrook, your MLA is Hon. Scott Moe.

13) Why are the current and future Saskatchewan MLAs being targeted in this petition? Isn't this only the Minister of Health's portfolio? (This part is a bit long, but it is very important.)

The Saskatchewan Program Guidelines for Special Care Homes (LTC standards) fall within the framework of, and under the authority of, The Provincial Health Authority Act (PHA Act). These are documents of provincial government jurisdiction and accountability.

Under the PHA Act, the Saskatchewan Minister of Health has the authority to develop, implement, and evaluate provincial health care policies among many other things. However, the Cabinet (led by the premier) has influence over the Minister of Health’s decisions and priorities. Cabinet also has the authority to support and formalize the requested change, including through formal enactment of the Lieutenant Governor in Council, if required, through the PHA Act.

For anyone wanting a closer look at the relevant parts of the PHA Act, it gives the Minister of Health powers that can be viewed here and the Lieutenant Governor in Council powers that can be viewed here.

The term Lieutenant Governor in Council refers to the Lieutenant Governor acting on the decisions of Cabinet. In that context, decision-making power lies with Cabinet. In practice, the Lieutenant Governor in Council provides formal legal approval but has no input on the Cabinet decisions she or he is signing off on.

These are the MLAs that make up the constantly changing Cabinet: After the last provincial election on October 28, 2024, a new smaller Cabinet was formed with a new MLA in every minister position, and a list of those MLAs can be found here. Recently, on December 11, 2025, another substantial turnover took place, and the updated list of MLAs in new Cabinet roles can be found here. These people make up one of the most powerful groups in Saskatchewan at the systemic level. They influence the policies of all Saskatchewan ministries.

It is difficult to hold any individual MLA acting as a minister accountable, like the Minister of Health, because the ministers and cabinet change whenever the premier wants through cabinet shuffles. They also can change after elections. Cabinet members also usually act in unison and can face discipline for going against Cabinet decisions after they’ve been made. Currently the Saskatchewan Party MLAs are in power. Many of them sit in Cabinet and are ministers. In relation, if the NDP gained majority of seats during a provincial election, the NDP would be in power, and its MLAs would form Cabinet and be ministers. The bottom line is things are always changing, one way or the other. People often don’t stay in the same roles for long. 

For those reasons, targeting all the current and future MLAs that people of Saskatchewan elect hold them accountable to this petition and to the public they serve. Knowing what each MLA’s stance is about the requested change helps inform their voters if they are being represented.

14) Why isn’t the Saskatchewan Ombudsman being targeted? Why aren’t the Saskatchewan Ministry of Health staff? Why aren’t the Saskatchewan Health Authority Client Concerns Specialists the focus here?

It is common for the public to be directed at those officials that deal more with individual care concerns. The requested change in this petition would save those officials a lot of time from dealing with as many safety issues and critical incidents in the first place. However, the requested change is out of their control. The authority and duty rests with the MLAs, specifically the premier, Cabinet, and Minister of Health.

15) When looking at the Saskatchewan Program Guidelines for Special Care Homes (LTC standards), it reads as a Ministry of Health document. Isn’t this just an isolated Ministry of Health matter? Isn’t this petition exaggerating who controls the change?

Absolutely not. One potential response to this petition from the government may try to make the public think this is a Ministry of Health issue. While it is a Ministry of Health document, the Ministry of Health staff are not independent decision makers and follow a chain of command leading to the Deputy Minister of Health. The Deputy Minister’s boss is the Minister of Health. The Minister of Health is the elected official who greatly influences and supports the big decisions within the Ministry of Health - those decisions are greatly influenced by Cabinet priorities led by the premier. The powers set out in the PHA Act are clear (refer to part 13).

MLAs can also have indirect influence over decisions of ministers, Cabinet, and priorities of their political parties. And the MLA who is the premier leads it all.  

16) What legislative and policy authorities support this change request?

Constitutional Authority (highest weight):

• Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms:
  • Section 7: Guarantees the right to life and security of the person. Staff not reading care plans directly threatens this right.
  • Section 15: Guarantees equality without discrimination on the basis of age or disability. Many LTC residents are elderly and/or living with disabilities. Failing to require staff to read care plans disproportionately harms these groups, which amounts to discriminatory neglect of their rights.

Provincial Statutes (binding law in Saskatchewan):

• Provincial Health Authority Act:
  • Gives the Minister of Health, and Cabinet led by the premier (via the Lieutenant Governor in Council), authority to set standards for health services and facilities, including LTC.
• Accessible Saskatchewan Act (2023):
  • Requires public sector bodies to identify and remove barriers in service delivery. Not requiring staff to read care plans is a clear barrier to safe and appropriate care.
  • Section 1-4: This Act Binds the Crown. This means the Government of Saskatchewan and its ministries must follow this law. They can’t opt out.
  • Section 1-5: “If a provision of this Act or the regulations conflicts with a provision of any other Act, regulations made pursuant to any other Act or a municipal bylaw, the provision of this Act or the regulations prevails unless the other provision requires a higher level of accessibility for persons with disabilities.” This means accessibility obligations come first.
• Saskatchewan Human Rights Code (2018):
  • Prohibits neglect or unequal treatment of vulnerable residents based on disability or age.

Policy Standards (binding in practice under provincial law):

• Saskatchewan Program Guidelines for Special Care Homes (LTC standards):
  • These guidelines, issued under the authority of the Provincial Health Authority Act, guarantee every resident dignity, safety, respect, and individualized care.
  • Those rights are undermined when care staff are not required to read and understand care plans.

17) What are recommendations that support the requested change?

Saskatchewan is facing healthcare staffing shortage pressures. This predictable factor puts residents at greater risk for care plans not being read and understood. This makes many of these things more important at this time, particularly the things bolded below. Many places providing LTC already do some of these things. It is recognized that no LTC setting is exactly the same and some of the things listed may be altered somewhat.

Doing these things will be easier in smaller LTC settings with lower numbers of residents. More planning and time will be needed in larger LTC facilities with bigger care teams in units with more residents. These things are very possible - it just takes more organization:

1. Leadership and Accountability

• Leadership: Task unit/home managers, resident care coordinators, and charge nurses with ensuring care plan compliance and providing guidance to all staff.
• Documentation of review: Require staff to initial/sign that they have reviewed and understand care plans during orientation, when assigned to new residents, or when care plans have been updated. This helps ensure continuity of care. It provides transparency of when it is and is not happening. It helps staff keep track and stay informed. An example of what this could look like can be found here.
• Incident reporting: When staff providing care cannot follow the above expectation, document and report it. This provides critical data of how well staff are supported and what working conditions must be improved to meet the safety needs on the frontline. An example of what this could look like can be found here.
• Quality surveillance: Build care plan review into Ministry of Health routine inspections, audits, and LTC setting supervisory checks.

2. Team Assignment and Continuity

• Consistent staff-resident assignments: Whenever possible, keep staff teams assigned to the same residents. This reduces the need to learn many new care plans all at one time and builds stronger familiarity with residents.
• Small-group allocation: Divide units into smaller care “pods” (e.g., fewer than 10 residents) so staff are only responsible for a subset of care plans at a time.

3. Cross-Coverage and Contingency Plans

• Covering staff protocols: When staff must work with unfamiliar residents or in unfamiliar units, require them to read the care plans at the beginning of their shifts.
• Assign newer staff or staff covering to the lowest-risk residents.
• Supervised coverage: Pair unfamiliar staff with a senior or regular staff member for direct support until they are comfortable.

4. Phased Implementation

• Staggered rollout: Introduce the requirement in phases (e.g., new admissions first, high-risk residents first, medium-risk residents next, then remaining residents afterwards).
• Orientation priorities: Focus orientation on residents with the most complex or high-risk needs, then expand to others.

5. Training and Professional Development

• Learning: Provide staff paid time to read/review the necessary care plans at the beginning of their shifts. In some LTC settings, this will likely require extending and overlapping care team shifts by 1 hour so residents aren't left unsupervised. When staff unfamiliar with residents work, they must be provided appropriate paid time to read the necessary care plans so care can align with care plans as it is always supposed to. This is a fixable operational issue.
• Ongoing refreshers: Provide time for all staff during their shifts to review care plans.
• Key care plan updates: Use "huddles" and shift-change briefings to reinforce key care plan updates.
• Targeted orientation: Instead of full-facility training days, build unit-based or small-group sessions to review care plans. These are shorter, less disruptive, and more practical.

6. Reminders of Purpose: Keep the End-Goal and Benefits in Sight

• This change protects residents’ rights and safety and supports staff to meet their duty of care.
• Over time it reduces crises, incident reports, and follow-up investigations - freeing up time for actual care.
• There is a learning period. After that, day-to-day work runs smoother with clearer direction and fewer surprises.

Please note that verbal relaying of bits of care plans, shift change briefings/huddles, the "mentor buddy system," and reading the MAR are all important. However, they should not be used as shortcuts or substitutes for reading the care plans as important resident information is missed.

18) Don’t LTC standards need to always be achievable? What about worst-case scenarios and extenuating circumstances? Another pandemic, staffing shortages, emergencies requiring staff deployment elsewhere are a few concerns. Therefore, can the requested change actually be written in the LTC standards?

At this very moment, there are current LTC standards outside this petition request not being followed. That does not warrant the current LTC standards to be watered down. That requires corrective actions.

During the pandemic, infection prevention and control measures were strengthened to protect residents, some of the most vulnerable to the virus. Many decision makers acted on known risks. It took the Canadian Armed Forces advocating publicly to make governments address the unsafe environments in many LTC settings. 

Residents do not lose their right to safety and dignity because of a staffing shortage. The law does not excuse negligence due to predictable systemic issues to work around.

Saying a safety standard is “unrealistic” because of poor staffing is like saying fire codes are “unrealistic” because contractors are busy. The solution is better planning, not weaker standards.

Emergencies do not justify abandoning safety standards. They justify having flexible methods to uphold those standards under pressure. The requested standard itself must remain uncompromised.

The requested change will require decision makers to better recognize known risks, put workable measures in place to keep residents safe, and strengthen support for LTC staff.

It is more unrealistic to believe safe care can happen without staff being properly supported to read, know, and follow residents’ care plans. This is not happening under good faith.

The bottom line: Would you be comfortable with someone coming to work with you or your loved one who did not properly know the care plan, and then providing care? Imagine that happening if you were not able to speak up for yourself and the care being done wrong. This is not ok.

19) What data is there about this issue?

As of November 13, 2025, a formal data collection request has been initiated. The LTC healthcare workers' unions, Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE)-Local 5430, Service Employees International Union (SEIU)-West, and Saskatchewan Union of Nurses (SUN) have been reached out to for help with this. This issue unifies them all.

The unions were written in a joint letter. They have been asked to survey LTC staff providing direct resident care under the jurisdiction of the LTC standard being criticized. This request fully aligns with the unions' mandates. The data collection outcome will provide a better understanding of how the current LTC standard operates on the frontlines and the safety gap of concern at the provincial level.

The acquired data will also help further inform Saskatchewan voters and all MLAs about needed improvements to healthcare staff working conditions to be safe and realistic.

20) I received a handout about this petition and I would like to share the same handout with others.

The handout can be found here. Once printed off, it can be cut into 1/3 to make 3 copies. Alternatively, it can also be copy-pasted into text messages, emails, and social media posts.

21) When were the decision makers made aware of this issue?

As of February 4, 2026, all of the Saskatchewan Members of the Legislative Assembly (MLAs) have been formally made aware of this issue. The MLAs (and others) received the following letter PDF in a group email, found here.

______________________________________________________________________________

This change is necessary and long overdue. Resident safety is non-negotiable. Elected officials have the power - and duty - to fix this. This is an opportunity for Saskatchewan to lead in healthcare.

If you agree, please sign and share this petition!

And ask your MLA to be public about his or her stance on this petition before the government meets about it.

To any LTC workers reading this, thank you for everything you do every day.

______________________________________________________________________________

Media Coverage - Thank you for helping to spread awareness:

• October 29, 2025, Moose Jaw Express, page A34, found here
• November 9, 2025, sasktoday.ca, found here
• November 29, 2025, Saskatoon StarPhoenix, found here
• November 29, 2025, Regina Leader Post, found here
• February 26, 2026, Clark's Crossing Gazette, page 2, found here
• March 13, 2026, Last Mountain Times, found here