Background.With the release of the Romanow Commission report, Canadian governments are poised to consider the creation of a national home care program. If occupational and physical therapists are to have input in shaping such a program, they will need to learn from lost opportunities of the past. Purpose.This paper provides an overview of recent reforms to home care in Ontario with an emphasis on rehabilitation services. Method.Data were collected from documents and 28 key informant interviews with rehabilitation professionals. Results.Home care in Ontario has evolved in a piecemeal manner without rehabilitation professionals playing a prominent role in program design. Practice Implications.Rehabilitation services play a critical role in facilitating hospital discharges, minimizing readmissions, and improving the quality of peoples' lives. Canadians will benefit if occupational and physical therapists seize the unique opportunity before them to provide meaningful input into creating a national home care program.
BaranekP.M.DeberR. & WilliamsA.P. (2004). Almost Home: Reforming home and community care inOntario. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press.
2.
Cloutier-FisherD. & JosephA. E. (2000). Long-term care restructuring in rural Ontario: Retrieving community service user and provider narratives. Social Science & Medicine, 50, 1037–1045.
3.
Commission on the Future of Health Care in Canada (Romanow Commission). (2002). Building on values: The future of health care in Canada. Ottawa, ON: Queen's Printer.
4.
DeberR. B. & WilliamsA. P. (1995). Policy, payment and participation: Long-term care reform in Ontario. Canadian Journal on Aging, 14, 294–318.
5.
DoranD.PickardJ.HarrisJ.CoyteP. C.MacRaeA.LaschingerH., et al. (2002). Competitive bidding for community-based nursing services: Report of phase 1, community nursing services studyToronto, ON: Faculty of Nursing, University of Toronto.
6.
FullerC. (2001). Home care: What we have, what we need. Ottawa, ON: The Canadian Health Coalition.
7.
Health Services Restructuring Commission. (1998). Planning guidelines and implementation strategies for home care, long term care, mental health, rehabilitation, and sub-acute care. Toronto, ON: Health Services Restructuring Commission.
8.
Government of Ontario. (1981). The elderly in Ontario: An agenda for the 80's: Task force on ageing report. Secretariate for Social Development. Toronto, ON: Queen's Printer.
9.
Government of Ontario. (1994). Bill 173, An act respecting long term care. Toronto, ON: Queen's Printer.
10.
Ontario Community Support Association. (2000). The effect of the managed competition model on home care in Ontario: Emerging issues and recommendations. Toronto: ON: Author.
11.
Ontario Home Health Care Providers' Association. (1995). Managed competition: A model for in-home services. Toronto, ON: Author.
12.
Ontario Ministry of Community and Social Services, Ontario Ministry of Health, Ontario Office for Senior Citizen's Affairs, & Ontario Office for Disabled Persons. (1990). Strategies for change: Comprehensive reform of Ontario's long-term care services. Toronto, ON: Queen's Printer.
13.
Ontario Ministry of Health, Ontario Ministry of Community and Social Services, & Ontario Ministry of Citizenship. (1993). Partnerships in long-term care: A new way to plan, manage and deliver services and community support. A policy framework. Toronto, ON: Queen's Printer.
14.
RandallG. E. & WilliamsA. P. (2006). Exploring limits to market-based reform: Managed competition and rehabilitation home care services in Ontario. Social Science & Medicine, 62, 1594–1604.
15.
WilliamsA. M. (1996). The development of Ontario's home care program: A critical geographical analysis. Social Science & Medicine42, 937–948.
16.
WilliamsA. P.BarnsleyJ.LeggatS.DeberR. & BaranekP. (1999). Long-term care goes to market: Managed competition and Ontario's reform of community-based services. Canadian Journal on Aging, 18 (2), 125–153.
