Across Ontario's healthcare system, a familiar buzz is often heard when the discussion turns to community-based services: we need more data. Sometimes it is expressed more bluntly: "No data, no money." The implication is that community support services have not yet generated sufficient evidence to justify greater investment. The suggestion is that if the sector could simply demonstrate demand, outcomes or system impact more convincingly, funding decisions would naturally follow. 

Yet for those working in our sector, this messaging feels increasingly disconnected from reality.

The challenge facing community support services in Ontario is not a lack of data. It is that the data we have been collecting, reporting and sharing for years has not translated into investment at a scale that reflects the growing needs of the population or the province's long-standing commitment to helping people age at home.

A Sector Rich in Information

Community support organizations routinely collect and report data on service volumes, waitlists, client needs, caregiver pressures, workforce capacity, quality indicators and outcomes. We know who we serve, what services are being delivered and where demand is outpacing capacity.

No one would argue that the data is perfect. But perfection is not the standard applied elsewhere in healthcare. Decisions regarding hospitals, primary care, long-term care and public health are routinely made using incomplete information, emerging evidence and the best available data. Community care should be no different.

Moving Toward Greater Standardization

Some critics argue that the diversity of community support services makes it difficult to generate consistent, system-wide evidence. That concern is becoming less relevant. Accreditation has strengthened consistency in policies, quality monitoring, outcome measurement and continuous improvement across many organizations. Ontario’s implementation of the interRAI Community Health Assessment (RAI-CHA) is creating a more standardized approach to measuring client needs and outcomes. 

As this information becomes more broadly available through the Canadian Institute for Health Information, organizations and policymakers will have access to a richer and more consistent picture of client needs, complexity and outcomes across the sector. Together, these developments are strengthening the sector's ability to demonstrate impact while preserving the flexibility needed to respond to local needs.

The Data is not Ambiguous

If there is one message the sector's data has consistently conveyed, it is that demand is growing. Ontario's population is aging. Older adults are living longer, often with multiple chronic conditions. Family caregivers are taking on increasingly complex responsibilities while balancing work, personal commitments and their own health needs.

At the same time, health system planners, policymakers and governments have repeatedly emphasized the importance of aging at home. Few would disagree with the principle. Most older adults wish to remain in their communities for as long as possible. Doing so is associated with better quality of life and often reduces pressure on more costly parts of the healthcare system.

Through services such as transportation, meals, adult day programs, assisted living and community navigation, community organizations help older adults remain safe, healthy and connected at home. The demand for these services is not hypothetical. It is visible every day in growing caseloads, longer waitlists and increasing service complexity. The sector has been documenting that need for years.

When Accountability Becomes One-Way

A more difficult question is whether the information being reported is meaningfully influencing investment decisions. Community organizations devote considerable effort to accountability and reporting. Funders rightly expect transparency regarding performance, outcomes and stewardship of public resources.

If providers are expected to demonstrate growing demand, measurable impact and effective use of resources, funders should also be prepared to explain how the evidence is used to inform planning and investment decisions. Too often, organizations experience reporting as a one-directional exercise. Data is submitted. Dashboards are completed. Indicators are tracked. Yet the realities highlighted by data persist year after year.

Demand grows. Waitlists expand. Workforce pressures intensify. Meanwhile, conversations continue to focus on the need for additional evidence. At some point, the question shifts from whether enough information exists to whether the available information is being acted upon.

The Cost of Inaction

The consequences of underinvestment in community support services are becoming increasingly difficult to ignore. Organizations face significant challenges recruiting and retaining staff in a competitive labour market. Funding levels often make it difficult to offer compensation that reflects the value and complexity of the work being performed.

Programs that have demonstrated success struggle to expand. Some organizations rely on fundraising to support services that many would consider essential components of the continuum of care. Others are forced to make difficult decisions about service levels in the face of rising demand.

Our healthcare system continues to emphasize prevention, community-based care and aging at home. Yet the organizations most directly responsible for delivering these objectives often lack the resources necessary to meet growing demand. When community capacity is constrained, pressure does not disappear. It shifts elsewhere in the system, often to emergency departments, hospitals, long-term care homes and family caregivers.

A Different Question

Perhaps it is time to stop asking whether community support services have enough data. A more useful question may be: what level of evidence is sufficient to act? The evidence already available tells a clear and consistent story. None of these trends are new. Nor are they difficult to detect. If aging at home continues to be a provincial priority, then community support services must increasingly be viewed as essential healthcare infrastructure. The data has been telling us this story for years.  

Comments

Keith Whalen wrote:

Posted 2026/10/08 at 01:53 PM EDT